Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies/Archive 76

Should the article Prostasia exist there are sources to support it. The Independent's double standards for J.K. Rowling | The Spectator , Is Noah Berlatsky Getting Cancelled? | www.splicetoday.com , Virginia professor resigns amid uproar over comments about adults attracted to children | The Independent , Pedophiles Partner with Influential Universities to Normalize Child Abuse (4w.pub) , ‘Minor-attracted people’ is an attempt to sanitise child abuse - spiked (spiked-online.com) Dwanyewest (talk) 21:38, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Dwanyewest. Of the sources you've listed, here are my thoughts:

• The Spectator: this source only has two lines about the organization. The rest is about JK Rowling, and then about an employee of the org.
• Splice Today: I'm not familiar with this source, and it doesn't appear on RSP. It's mentioned once in the RSP archives, but that's tangentially and not an assessment. They do discuss the org in depth in their article, and it has a byline.
• The Independent: This source is paywalled for me, so I can't access it. From the title it seems to be about a professor, not the org, but I could be mistaken.
• 4W.pub: I'm not familiar with this source, and it doesn't appear on RSP. They do discuss the org in depth in their article, and it has a byline.
• Spiked: This has three lines about the org, with no further coverage than what was covered by 4W.

What I'm seeing is if the Spliced Today source would be considered a RS, you've got that one and then 4W, which also seems to be in-depth coverage. The Spectator and Spiked aren't about the org. I can't access the Independent, so you or others would have to determine weight of the coverage. With topics that are often contested and hotly debated (as I assume this would be), solid coverage is the best way to get the article to "stick". If I were creating this at the moment, I wouldn't consider it a slam dunk. But that's only an opinion, and you are of course free to create whatever article you'd like! --Kbabej (talk) 22:09, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Just to fill in the gaps regarding your comment:

• The article in The Independent doesn't mention Prostasia by name at all, the name just appeared in an image caption of the professor in question
• 4W.pub (4W means "for women") is an activist publication, from an anti-trans feminist POV. Not entirely related, but the author of that article (Anna Slatz) went on to co-found and write for reduxx.info, which is more of the same. Wouldn't call 4W reliable.

I don't think the Prostasia Foundation is notable enough to write about yet. Endwise (talk) Endwise (talk) 22:25, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

And the Spliced article appears to be an opinion piece by someone who by their own admission "can’t stand" Berlatsky, the communications director for Protasia whom the article is about. There are at least questions to be asked there about reliability in this context. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 09:16, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

I would be very careful when creating an article on a subject like this and ensure that the sources are up-to-snuff. This sort of subject can be very dangerous for Living Persons related to it. I would personally refrain from writing an article on a subject like this with less than a dozen sources, but of course that might be cautious of me. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 09:35, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello!

I've been trying to improve the Agenda Europe article, but my edits will be substantial and I want some eyes on what I have so far before I go ahead and post.

I've left a message on its talk page with the link to my sandbox, which has the edits I plan to make, as well as what issues I think my revision may have due to my inexperience with editing WP. I was directed to post a notice here to direct more attention to it.

Thank you. 🎜Oktavia Miki🎝_talk 00:57, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

The climbing article Taylor Parsons has been PROD'ed twice (once by me) as there is almost no RS on "Taylor Parsons", however, Taylor transitioned from Chris Webb Parsons, a bouldering climber for whom there is RS (and therefore it is a valid BLP). I can see in the article's history that someone made a direct request to the WP help desk to rename the article from Chris to Taylor (to reflect the transition). My question is how is this handled in the BLP - do we say in the lede something like "Taylor Parsons (previously known as Chris Webb Parsons)? What is the correct format/approach? To my knowledge, she is the first climber that I have ever known to have made a transition. 09:48, 6 January 2023 (UTC) 78.18.228.191 (talk) 09:48, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

You might find MOS:GENDERID helpful. Specifically on the question of former names of people who have transitioned, it says: A living transgender or non-binary person's former name should be included in the lead sentence of their main biographical article only if they were notable under it; introduce the name with "born" or "formerly". So if Parsons was notable before she transitioned, the lead should begin something like: "Taylor Parsons (born Chris Webb Parsons) is an Australian professional rock-climber..." Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 10:54, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Chelsea Manning and Caitlyn Jenner are both Good Articles which are biographies of living trans people notable under their pre-transition name, if you want example articles to be able to point to. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 10:58, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for that - much appreciated. 78.18.228.191 (talk) 11:35, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Noting Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Let Her Burn here, as it is apparently an issue that Queerty is a source for the subject. BD2412 T 03:05, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

There is an RfC at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Charles-Valentin_Alkan#RfC:_Alkan_and_Masarnau that may be of interest to editors in this project. Feel free to join, contributions welcome! Chip-chip-2020 (talk) 15:53, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

I'd like to get some help and discussion here, please. Cidertail (talk) 09:53, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi everyone,

Some of you might have participated in previous years' events, which have yielded a ton of improved Appalachian content on Wikipedia.

For 2023, folks from WVU libraries and beyond are holding an asynchronous editing event for the entire month of March (1-31)!

Our Edit-a-thon is focused on amplifying the stories and figures of under-represented Appalachian artists, writers, and other creators, particularly womxn, people of color, LGBTQ+ individuals, and other disenfranchised communities. We have been lucky enough to work with Art+Feminism and our event is held under that umbrella!

If you want to participate, please sign up through this link: https://artandfeminism.org/edit_a_thon/amplifying-appalachia-2023-edit-a-thon/ ... which will take you to our event dashboard, which has some starting points for pages that need some attention (under construction as of 2/4/2022). The password to join is "app23" (no quotation marks). Rhizomesandranch (talk) 17:06, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

The Draft:Bund für Menschenrecht was the first gay organization in the world. This draft was created by a now-indeffed sockpuppet as a translation of de:Bund für Menschenrecht on German Wikipedia, but the topic is definitely notable, and deserves to have an article here. If someone could check the sourcing a bit, and either move it to mainspace if it's ready for prime time, or beef it up if not, that would be a great addition to coverage of the LGBT space. Mathglot (talk) 10:14, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Buidhe brought First homosexual movement to FA and might have the sources and knowledge to do something with this... Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 10:36, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Cool article! And there's already a ton of pages in the english wikipedia that can link to it. Sativa Inflorescence (talk) 19:59, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Recently, I've done a little work on this page, and added some citation needed tags to it, in hopes that people will add reliable sources to the many characters on there. However, I feel it would be too much work for me to add all these citations alone, as there are currently 219 citation needed tags on the page. And since hundreds visit it every day, I'd say it would be better to add these citations and clean-up the page sooner rather than later. I know there is no deadline to add citations, but some of those citation needed notices have been there for a few years and have not been remedied. Would anyone on here like to help by adding some citations to the page? Past collaboration on adding citations to LGBTQ pages has been successful, and I am hopeful it would be helpful in this case as well. If this isn't the right place to post this, let me know. It would be great to have this page improved by the end of this year. Historyday01 (talk) 21:34, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 January 17#Category:People who detransitioned
William Allen Simpson (talk) 05:07, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

The Irene Dubois article has been nominated for deletion. Discussion participation welcome. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:32, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

We have submitted a research proposal under the Wikimedia Research Fund and we would like to hear your comments to see what do you think about it and help us! It is here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Programs/Wikimedia_Research_Fund/Wikidata_to_Gender_Rescue_on_Wikipedia_(WiGeData_) Nferranf (talk) 20:46, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

For information, there was some previous discussion, and mention of this project over at Wiki Women in Red last November. Lajmmoore (talk) 07:56, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

I've thrown LGBT and Wikipedia into the main space to see what happens. Project members are invited to please update and expand appropriately. Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:02, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

There's a lot of anti-LGBT legislation that has been or is being introduced across the United States, yet the "LGBT rights in <State>" articles are often woefully lagging. I think it would be prudent to create a taskforce with a centralized page linking to the articles were people can self-assign to one or more states, so we can keep track of it all, see where work is needed, and split the workload. I'm thinking similar to WP:CANLGBT but with a table format with each row linking to the state, saying what may need to be done, and listing those who've assigned themselves. Does anyone else think this is a good idea or have ideas for implementation? Would anyone object if I just went ahead a created a page for it? TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 21:03, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Sure, go ahead. That sounds like a good idea. Historyday01 (talk) 21:04, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Went ahead and created WP:USALGBT, anybody interested please feel free to join and assign yourself a state! Currently nearly all of them are marked as needing review TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 22:02, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

I've added the group page to my watchlist. Would love to see an active collaboration here and invite others to join. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:18, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

This is a great idea. I would like to join this taskforce! :)

— JuanGLP (talk) 03:29, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Please consider contributing to the "Should the Article Name the Suspect?" discussion at Talk:Wi Spa controversy. Mox La Push (talk) 05:54, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Project-independent quality assessments. This proposes support for quality assessment at the article level, recorded in {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and inherited by the wikiproject banners. However, wikiprojects that prefer to use custom approaches to quality assessment can continue to do so. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:24, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

When I was doing some work for WP:USALGBT, I came across Kia Anthony, a mayor of Spring Lake, North Carolina, since November 2021 (also see here) and has been noted in publications like QNotes Carolinas and Baltimore Out Loud (both quoting from the a paywalled article in the Fayettesville Observer), along with other articles in the Fayettesville Observer (also see here, here, here and others behind a paywall), Spectrum News, Charlotte Business Journal (behind a paywall), City View (also see here), CBS 17, Disability Rights North Carolina, 11 ABC, and WRAL. She also appears to have mentioned being a lesbian not on her Twitter, but on her Instagram account. Do you all think this is enough for a page, should I try and find more, or should I incorporate this somewhere else, onto another page instead? Historyday01 (talk) 14:30, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

@Historyday01: I guess that being mayor of Spring Lake makes Anthony a local politician, so per WP:POLITICIAN she would need "significant press coverage" to be notable. I think some of the content you link is either routine (coverage of all candidates' manifestos) or not significant coverage (formal comments on a news story). The Fayettesville Observer content looks in-depth and at least a couple of sources should contribute to notability but whether it gets over the threshold is not too clear to me. — Bilorv (talk) 22:04, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Ok, I'll wait a little longer and see if there's more for notability-sake, before creating a page. Historyday01 (talk) 22:56, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello everyone! I would like your input on a discussion on the List of The Owl House characters talk page, about whether to split off the section for Amity Blight into its own page. Currently, the page is draft available at Draft:Amity Blight, and consensus in this discussion is important to determine whether this character should get its own article. Thanks and I hope to see your comments. Historyday01 (talk) 01:37, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

There is a merge discussion here for the "Genderqueer" and "Genderqueer people" categories. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 05:39, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

There is a merge discussion for almost all of the queer-related categories here. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 07:03, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

At Talk:Cardcaptor Sakura: Clear Card#Political piece added as reception, there is a currently discussion, with some editors claiming that Anime Feminist should not be added as a source in the reception section of the Cardcaptor Sakura: Clear Card page, claiming it is not "notable", "helpful", and the site is not "reputable", so outside input would be appreciated. Historyday01 (talk) 20:20, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

The fact that the site is political is literally stated in its very name and they have never hidden it. However, for all its controversy in general, the site is quite authoritative in terms of feminist or one of the feminist content assessments. So if you're going to use it as an opinion on the show, I don't think it should be a problem. Solaire the knight (talk) 20:53, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

That was my thought as well. Most of the discussion currently is filled with IP addresses, which can be slanted against LGBTQ topics, so I'm not too surprised, to be honest, on the discussion on there. Historyday01 (talk) 21:23, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Well, if they have a global claim to AF as a source, then they can always discuss it on the source evaluation forum. Disagreeing with the resource's political stance or subjective discussions about the "importance" of queer topics in the show is pretty extraneous. Solaire the knight (talk) 21:42, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

I agree. I doubt they will discuss it there. Historyday01 (talk) 02:15, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

At Talk:Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism#Category: Organizations that oppose transgender rights, there is currently a debate about whether transgender students have the right to not be misgendered/deadnamed in schools. Apparently, citations to US laws, UN statements, and human rights groups are meaningless if an editor loudly repeats their opinions that those sources don't count and trans students don't have that right, so outside input would be appreciated. TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 14:09, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Lest this get unnecessarily heated, the question is simply whether Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism should be in Category:Organizations that oppose transgender rights, per WP:DEFINING. More opinions welcome. --Animalparty! (talk) 17:30, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

I apologize for the misleading description here, I've started an RFC in the linked talk page.

Quoting the prompt from there: can we categorize an organization as an "organization opposed to LGBT/transgender rights" in an instance where the organization is known for opposing a particular LGBT right, but the sources mentioning that don't say it's a right? For the simplest example: if an organization is known for campaigning against same-sex marriage, are our criteria for categorizing them as "an organization that opposes LGBT rights" based on 1) whether the WP:RS commenting on their opposition to same-sex marriage explicitly call same-sex marriage an LGBT right or 2) whether WP:RS generally consider same-sex marriage an LGBT right? TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 17:22, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Project members are invited to improve the new stub, Grag Queen. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:26, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

I've opened a discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Community-authorized sanctions for gender identity that may be of interest to this WikiProject. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:40, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

I saw the draft for Charles Ortleb. It appears that it may be of interest to members of this project. Thriley (talk) 16:26, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

A deletion discussion for polysexual categories is happening here. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 05:20, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Noting Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tri-Ess here, as the nom claims that the organization is transphobic. Comments would be appreciated. Historyday01 (talk) 02:56, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Discussion about adding a category, if you have an opinion, please share (there). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:38, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello! I'm writing an article about a transgender music producer/songwriter. It just so happens to be my first article from scratch, so errors inbound. I've currently put the article in draftspace, due to the (relative?) lack of sources: Draft:Patricia Taxxon. While mostly mentioned by sources about music, I also found two sources that might be usable where Taxxon's (supposed?) mother mentioned her and her being transgender as inspiration for a written novel. Any help or feedback of any kind is appreciated, even if the improvements aren't enough to make the article mainspace-level. I also have a question:

• Is Taxxon notable enough for the article to be moved into mainspace, even as a stub? Ignoring the sources about her mother's novel, I think Taxxon meets WP:GNG when it comes to her music but I'm unsure whether she meets WP:NARTIST#3. I remember reading somewhere in Wikipedia that three sources is recommended for an article, which I think Taxxon meets and then some, but I can't find the exact page.

Thank you! (Assuming it would be helpful to say, I've also requested the help of WikiProject Music, since Taxxon is a music producer. Diff here.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by LightNightLights (talk • contribs) 04:31, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Are there any independent sources discussing her theory of pop harmony? I think it would be an interesting topic to cover in the article if possible. small jars tc 00:05, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

I wasn't really able to find sources about her theory when I researched sources, though I agree that it would be interesting. Thanks for the {{unsigned}} addition; I didn't even notice that there was no signature here (though I signed my post at WT:WPMU). LightNightLights ^(talk) 12:27, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:History of LGBT characters in animation#Page name change/purpose?, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. Thanks! Historyday01 (talk) 22:04, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Here I've asked about possible FA status and even potential co-nominators for Cherry Valentine. Are any project members interested? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:28, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

I've been trying to fill out this abandoned draft for a bit. It's got a lot of work done on it already and it seems a shame to let it go to waste. Would anyone else here like to help out? Loki (talk) 04:50, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Isn't this already an article at TERF? If there's useful content it can be merged in. Galobtter (pingó mió) 05:58, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

I have to agree. It would make sense to merge the content there rather than creating a new page. Historyday01 (talk) 13:58, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

TERF is currently on an article on the term "TERF", whereas Draft:Gender-critical feminism is about gender-critical/TERF theory/ideology/philosophy. Gender-critical feminism currently exists in mainspace as a redirect to Feminist views on transgender topics#Gender-critical feminism and trans-exclusionary radical feminism. I'm inclined to think that having separate articles on "TERF" the term and the gender-critical ideology as a whole is a better idea than trying to cover the two in a single article, but I don't really have a strong opinion on which is correct. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 14:45, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Yes, this exactly. TERF is about the term specifically. Our main article on gender-critical/trans-exclusionary feminism is feminist views on transgender topics, which in my opinion is obviously insufficient. Loki (talk) 14:51, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi, per this discussion, I am looking for someone to create an image of a compilation of 6 women and another of 6 non-binary people to use for the page Media portrayals of bisexuality, as the 6 used in the article's current main image are all men. I’m looking for it to be in a similar style to the compilation photo of the 6 men used on that page currently. I will be looking to hopefully post some potential photos we could use on the respective talk page soon. Using a variety of generations and nationalities would be good for global representation. Helper201 (talk) 00:37, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

I have compiled a multiple image box of bisexual women for the page and I'm open to feedback for it here and/or on the linked talk page. If anyone wants to crop these photos together as is done for the photo of the men on Media portrayals of bisexuality I'm fine with that too. I could still use some help in doing something similar for bisexual non-binary people. Helper201 (talk) 01:08, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Much of the content between Gender and Gender Identity is largely the same. I have proposed a merger at this link, notified the other wikiproject involved, and invite people knowledgable in the area to comment. Born25121642 (talk) 05:16, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Henry Rollins has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:49, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 21#Queer categories, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. Sideswipe9th (talk) 22:25, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Please also see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 21#Genderqueer categories. Both discussions concern category merges that fall within the scope of this WikiProject. Thanks. Sideswipe9th (talk) 22:25, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Just by way of update, the discussion for genderqueer categories has now closed, with the result that the (now empty) Category:Genderqueer be deleted and Category:Genderqueer people be manually merged to Category:People with non-binary gender identities. The discussion on merging Category:Queer, Category:Queer people, and related categories has been relisted for further discussion.--Trystan (talk) 23:50, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

In light of some recent drive-by editing by a certain user, I decided to propose some mergers of various pages about LGBTQ animated characters:

• Animated series with LGBT characters: 1990s into History of LGBT characters in animation: 1990s, discussion here

• Animated series with LGBT characters: 2000s into History of LGBT characters in animation: 2000s, discussion here

• Animated series with LGBT characters: 2010s into History of LGBT characters in animation: 2010s, discussion here

Also, if you haven't already, I'd encourage you to participate in this discussion about the proposed merger of Animated series with LGBT characters: 2020s and List of animated series with LGBT characters: 2020–present, which has been stale since Dec. 2022, and the discussion about possible name change/purpose of History of LGBT characters in animation.

Thanks! Historyday01 (talk) 17:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

I've created the new article LGBT culture in Puerto Vallarta.

Improvements welcome! Thanks ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:22, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

I've nominated the entry for GA status. ¿Por qué no? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:56, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Eddie Izzard#Requested move 15 March 2023 , which is within the scope of this WikiProject. The topic of the discussion is on moving the article due to Izzard's recent name change. Note, I'm making this notification manually as the RM doesn't seem to have been added to the alert list by the bot. Sideswipe9th (talk) 19:46, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Blanchard's transsexualism typology#Splitting off "Autogynephilia" into its own page, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. An editor has proposed recreating the autogynephilia article, by splitting the relevant content from Blanchard's typology. Sideswipe9th (talk) 19:36, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Lists of LGBT figures in fiction and myth#Expansion of LGBT figures in fiction and myth page, asking how to expand the "Lists of LGBT figures in fiction and myth" page so as to more fully encompass topics about LGBT characters and media within the scope of "fiction and myth", which is within the scope of this WikiProject. Thanks! Historyday01 (talk) 17:25, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

A friend (non-editor) pointed me to White_Town#Personal_life where it says he identifies as genderqueer and polyamorous. The concern is that the source is his Mastodon page which has those labels as tags, but doesn't necessarily explicitly say he's identifying as such. Now typically, I would still call it a safe assumption that that's exactly what those tags are there for and that it should be safe to infer that from them, but my friend wasn't so sure. After further checking, I found no secondary coverage on the matter, but also nothing else primary. None of the other pages associated with him (social media, streaming sites, etc.) appear to make any mention of it. So if it's just one page essentially but not exactly saying such, is that enough to leave it or should it go? QuietHere (talk | contributions) 21:02, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

@QuietHere Since it's a WP:BLP article and you've raised a serious concern of lack of sourcing other than the Mastodon page, I've removed the content and categories. Also replied on the article's talk page — DaxServer (t · m · c) 22:02, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, that seems like the right move. And thanks for tagging me in Talk:White Town#Genderqueer and Polyamorous. Silly me forgot to check the talk page to see if it had already been brought up. That discussion isn't exactly on the same question but it is related so it's valuable to have them together. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 22:05, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Ah true, I'll split it into a new section Talk:White Town#Genderqueer and Polyamorous sourcing — DaxServer (t · m · c) 22:16, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Project members are invited to improve the new stub: Drag Isn't Dangerous. — JuanGLP (talk + contribs) 23:46, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

In the process of helping to diffuse Category:20th-century LGBT people and Category:21st-century LGBT people, by moving people to an appropriate "XX-century [Nationality] LGBT people" subcategory if one exists, I've come across a significant problem that will require the attention of the project: specifically, while XX-century categories are supposed to be applied on the basis of the time period in which the person was notable, I came across a considerable number of people who had been categorized solely on the basis of their birthdate — if they were born in the 1990s, then they were categorized as a "20th-century person", even if they had never even initiated any sort of notability-building public visibility until after the century changeover.

That is, a person is not a "20th-century X" just because they were born in 1995, if the first time they ever verifiably did anything that added bricks to the foundation of their notability claim wasn't until 2015. It's not a question of "was this person alive in the 20th century", it's a question of "was this person already a known public figure in the 20th century".

This has tended primarily to hit newly prominent millennials in pop culture domains like music, acting, YouTubing or Drag Race, and generally not politicians or scientists or artists or writers. And on a couple of occasions, it even hit people who were born in 2000, and would literally only have been infants (and thus clearly not already notable or semi-notable performers) in the 20th century regardless of where you stand on the debate about whether 2000 was the last year of the 20th century or the first year of the 21st.

I've already removed it from some people who jumped out at me as obvious misfiles just by eyeballing their names (like baby Drag Race queens and Lil Nas X) but since I obviously don't know everybody and there are thousands of articles that would need to be checked, this will need an active cleanup project rather than being a thing I can look after entirely on my own. So I just wanted to post a request for some assistance. Bearcat (talk) 16:43, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the attention @Bearcat. This is one hell of a work. Since these are [mostly] WP:BLPs, I think we'll have to prioritise. I can do what I can as the time permits — DaxServer (t · m · c) 19:58, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

There are multiple discussions at Talk:2023 Covenant School shooting regarding how to list the name and gender identity of the suspect. Funcrunch (talk) 04:18, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Kris Jenner was married to Caitlyn Jenner. However, the current wiki page does not reflect this. Help is needed to clarify this. Talk:Kris Jenner Nonnormal87 (talk) 14:33, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

You received an appropriate answer based on what occurred to Kris's life. Please, refer to Wikipedia:Forum shopping for further information. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 19:53, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

I’m sure these questions have been raised before but I’m not having any luck searching through archived discussions, as all of my search terms are too commonly used. Please accept my apologies for rehashing.
To give some background: my work as an editor primarily centers on women's ice hockey, so all of my examples will be from that realm, but I am hoping for guidelines that will be much more broadly applicable. While I am queer, I don’t want to assume that my sexuality gives me any particular authority when discussing the sexuality of others.
A number of women's ice hockey players are dating or married to a women and it’s fairly common for such relationships to be documented by reputable secondary sources. However, it is often the case that the player has not formally "come out" or publicly stated their sexuality. In such intances, is it appropriate to specify that they are LGBTQ in the text? If yes, what is the best way to do so?
For example, Kerry Weiland and Christina Sorbara are married and their marriage is documented in references from the Toronto Star and WSJ. However, as far as I have found, Weiland has never spoken about being LGBTQ or publicly defined her sexuality. In Weiland’s article, I opted to included only the information which could be sourced, i.e. "Weiland is married to Christina Sorbara and they have three children" but I have two conflicting concerns:

1. As it is currently written, the reader is left to extrapolate that Weiland is LGBTQ, which seems counter to the purpose of an encyclopedia. Many Wikipedia articles that include "[Ice hockey player] is lesbian" have references that exclusively state she is in/has been in a relationship with a woman. Is there value in writing "Weiland is part of the LGBTQ community"? Or even "Weiland is queer/sapphic/[other general term]" or specifically "Weiland is lesbian" despite the fact that it may misrepresent her sexuality?
2. Weiland is very private about her life and, while she sometimes uses her married name (Weiland Sorbara), she does not mention her wife or children in interviews or professional bios and does not use public social media accounts. Though she was noted as an LGBTQ Olympian by Outsports, is it appropriate to include any information about her sexuality and marriage when one considers how private she keeps her personal life (per WP:NPF)?

Sorry for the extended post, I’ve been sitting on these questions for a long while and really appreciate any guidance. Spitzmauskc (talk) 23:24, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

The current text of Weiland's article looks good to me. Yes, the reader can infer that Wriland is queer based on her marriage to a woman, but if the sources don't state it then neither should we – there's no entirely neutral umbrella term that every woman married to another woman groups themselves under, so we can't be sure that any term we chose would be accurate, and it doesn't tell the reader anything they can't trivially deduce from the text of the article, because that's how we have established it! We definitely should not describe a person as a lesbian based on a source saying they are in a relationship with another woman – they could easily be bisexual! If and when a person publicly comes out and reliable sources talk about their sexuality when discussing them, then we can include it. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 06:23, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

And of course, behaviour != sexuality. Tamsyn Muir identifies as a lesbian (and our article describes her as such) despite the fact that she is married to a man, for instance. It's unusual, but not impossible, for someone to consider themselves heterosexual but still be in a same-gender relationship. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 10:31, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

"the reader is left to extrapolate that Weiland is LGBTQ, which seems counter to the purpose of an encyclopedia" I don't think this is the case. We need to report the information that is there, not extrapolate ourselves. I don't see any reason to label someone's sexuality if they don't care to do so themselves. Galobtter (pingó mió) 11:28, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Nobody is LGBTQ; that's a huge gathering of separate categories that as a group more define what you are not than what you are. Even if we accept her marriage to a woman as an indicator of her sexuality, we don't know if she's L, or B, or perhaps privately T... and if you think you can make a good guess where she falls because she's married to a woman, well then, the reader likely feels that way as well. And certainly historically we cannot judge desire by marriage; many a lesbian, bisexual, or asexual woman wound up married to a man. I would suspect that the odds of a straight CIS woman being married to a woman are much smaller, but the world is filled with odd complexities, and it seems unlikely that it hasn't happened somewhere, if only perhaps for a green card. We have plenty of biographical articles that do not even suggest the person's sexuality -- folks who have not married and did not engage in public dating - and those articles are not insufficient for that. --Nat Gertler (talk) 16:05, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

I have nominated But I'm a Cheerleader for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 02:08, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Lia Thomas, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Beccaynr (talk) 21:46, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, members of this WikiProject are invited to join in this discussion: Talk:Gabbi_Tuft#Should_we_use_a_pre-transition_photo_of_Tuft_in_the_infobox_until_we_acquire_a_post-transition_photo? Newimpartial (talk) 20:37, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Could somebody please tell me what is needed to get a current photo of me in my info box area? This has been going rounds for years now and I’d be incredibly grateful for anyone willing to help. Gabbituft (talk) 19:11, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

You'll need to have a photo that is released under terms compatible with those detailed at c:Commons:Licensing. The easiest way would be to take a selfie and upload it here agreeing to release it, or to have someone else take a picture and upload it there. If there's an existing photo by someone else who you could persuade to release it, you can follow these instructions: c:Commons:Volunteer_Response_Team#If_you_are_NOT_the_copyright_holder. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 21:05, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Uploaded:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gabbi_Tuft_March_2023.tif Gabbituft (talk) 14:32, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks,  Done ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 15:50, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Gabbituft (talk) 21:32, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography#Remove the "living" qualifier in MOS:DEADNAME, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. The discussion is about removing the living qualifier from MOS:DEADNAME. Thanks. Sideswipe9th (talk) 23:25, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Touching upon much of what the post above aims to deal with, there's ongoing discussion at Talk:2023 Covenant School shooting about whether or not to include the deadname of a dead trans person. (And, similarly, whether to prioritize the person's preferred name or their deadname.) Insight from editors who have more experiences with the nuances of MOS:GENDERID and surrounding precedents would be very helpful. Thanks! ● 2600:1700:87D3:3460:85C5:CB26:A7AA:3D4A (talk) 08:47, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

I wrote an article about the first and only drag quenn in Azerbaijan, Lady Slim. I wrote it in English for many reasons. But she's nominated for removal. Please take a look at this article.Lady Slim If you see fit, please contribute so that the article is preserved in Wikipedia. Futurolog21 (talk) 23:33, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Someone who might be Garrett Glaser is looking for assistance at WP:HD#How do I source the content below? and I'm wondering if anyone from this WikiProject would mind trying to help them out. I left some general information on their user talk page, but perhaps someone might be able to add to that. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:57, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:23, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

I've created a new article Supriyo v. Union of India, which is the case on marriage rights for Gay, lebsian, transgender and non-binary people in India. As the consolidated case is challenging the Indian Marriage Laws for discriminating on grounds of both sexual orientation and gender identity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki6995 (talk • contribs) 11:15, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

What happened to the page, drag panic? Was it deleted? — JuanGLP (talk + contribs) 12:19, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

It looks like it was moved to a draft: Draft:Drag panic Historyday01 (talk) 12:30, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

I've moved the article back into main space. I think the page should be improved and issues can be discussed on the talk page. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:27, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Ohhh, I thought someone deleted the page with no reason. — JuanGLP (talk + contribs) 14:33, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! I was just in the process of requesting that. I don't think it meets the criteria for draftification, especially since 2022 drag performance protests was merged there, which is outside the 90-day time limit mentioned at WP:DRAFTIFY.--Trystan (talk) 14:36, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

I agree, hence why I moved the page back. Onel5969 can discuss on the talk page, if preferred. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:37, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Project members might be interested in the newly created List of lesbian bars. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 19:42, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

I just created List of LGBT characters in The Simpsons. I don't edit much on LGBT topics, so I figure it might be a good idea to post it here. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 22:23, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Back in November I made some edits regarding Josie Totah, namely updating her name on some credits prior to when she publicly came out. (I meant to raise this question closer to when this occurred, but my December and January in real life were so hectic that I forgot all about it and was reminded today.) A handful of these edits stuck, but a handful were reverted with the rationale that she was notable under the other name and it was how she was credited, and when I discussed it with the person who reverted it, this was the conversation about it. I'm not looking to, like, prove anything or edit war or bring these edits back up myself (my real life is still feeling the effects from what made December and January so hectic; even if I had the energy to I simply don't have the time), but I wanted to raise the question here to improve my own understanding: Totah was privately out to her family prior to acting, but she was initially closeted when it came to acting roles (i.e. presenting as a boy, doing boy roles); however, it may be that she chose a stage name she was comfortable with at that time which was not her given name. However, now that she's publicly out, she's credited as Josie consistently. My understanding prior to those edits in November was that her prior stage name might count as a deadname, but now I'm just confused so I wanted to ask for clarification from people who might know their way around these guidelines more than I do? Is the rationale that she was privately out so the previously credited name doesn't "count" as a deadname correct and should I take that into account going forward? Just looking for a second opinion here. - Purplewowies (talk) 22:17, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

It looks to me like you're dealing with a situation that doesn't really need to be faced, because looking at a few quick examples (such as the filmography chart for Holly Robinson Peete and the section of Muhammad Ali on his acting), it seems we don't generally specify the "credited as" information for actors who changed their name during their career. That's an IMDb thing, not so much a Wikipedia thing. We definitely shouldn't be making special effort of that sort just because the name change goes with a gender identification, which is the main place where we discourage referring to an old name more than needed. --Nat Gertler (talk) 01:14, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

At first I wasn't completely clearly understanding your phrasing yesterday (I blame pulling a back muscle), but rereading it today it makes sense. Thanks! - Purplewowies (talk) 00:30, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Gene Robinson has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 19:45, 18 April 2023 (UTC)