This page is of interest toWikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of allLGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit theproject page or contribute to thediscussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies
This page is part ofWikiProject Gender studies. ThisWikiProject aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from Wikipedia. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this page, or visit theproject page for more information.Gender studiesWikipedia:WikiProject Gender studiesTemplate:WikiProject Gender studiesGender studies
This page is within the scope ofWikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofhuman sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality
Alerts – Lists active discussions for all project-tagged articles, including proposed moves and deletions, requests for comment, and nominations for featured content. Bot-updated daily.
Assessment – Lists changes to the quality assessment for all project-tagged articles. Can be used to review when articles are added to or removed from the project's scope. Bot-updated daily.
Hi, I'm a new-ish editor interested in LGBTQ+ issues. I'm trying to add to JK Rowling's page(s) some info on her (acephobic) statements about Asexual people. I have posted a suggested edit on the associated discussion page(s). A series of improvements were suggested for the content to be worth publishing and I complied, but it looks like I need more help. It was suggested to me that I could maybe find it here. Any advice would be much appreciated!
I have a template on my userpage (Wikipedia policies and guidelines) which you can expand to read the Wikipedia Guidelines. Feel free to put a copy on your own user page to refer to it later, it talks about what Wikipedia is. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, with articles that have a high level summary of the included topics. But I also recommend you read what Wikipedia is not:WP:NOT. Not every detail on a subject should be included. Wikipedia is not a place to post the latest outrage, gossip, or naughty thing someone posted to social media. It's not a place to advocate for specific points of view. We also haveWP:BLP: "Biographies of living persons must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives; the possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment" and "Do not label people with contentious labels, loaded language, or terms that lack precision, unless a person is commonly described that way in reliable sources. Instead use clear, direct language and let facts alone do the talking." This is why some discussion around the author's point of view are included, the ones that really have a lot of sources writing about them, but something that's just mentioned here or there wouldn't rise to the level of something important that should be included.Denaar (talk)21:30, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'm notthat new, I had already read those policies (and many others about primary sources, reliability, secondary sources, recentism, original research...), for example the fact that those statements were described as acephobic is from one of my "strongest" sources(The Independent) and in general the tone of my suggested edit isn't loaded or outraged, it's direct and cold. The coverage is there, both primary and secondary, but the discussion is at a standstill. I don't think that repeating the whole discussion(s) here too would be very useful, but if someone wants to take a look, the links are there. Thanks again,Poiutredsaa (talk)23:28, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to disagree with what Denaar is saying here in that I agree it is a notable issue, but it depends in how it is written and what sources are used. Citing JKR's exact tweets isn't necessary, as secondary sources can do the job.Historyday01 (talk)00:11, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
MOS:LABEL - "Value-laden labels – such as calling an organization a cult, an individual a racist, sexist, terrorist, or freedom fighter, or a sexual practice a perversion – may express contentious opinion and are best avoided unlesswidelyused by reliable sources to describe the subject, in which case use in-text attribution." Again, this hasn't risen to a level of coverage where it would be included.Denaar (talk)12:11, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
On this I have to disagree. In my view, it has "risen to a level of coverage where it would be included"but I would qualify such proposed inclusion of JKR's statements on asexual people in terms of how it is written, what sources are used, and how it is incorporated into the page. It certainly could be done in such a way that rises to the level of the rest of the page.Historyday01 (talk)13:14, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Historyday01 that this is notable but needs careful writing and is more appropriate for the Political views page than the main page. It has received coverage from multiple notable sources. If the politics page is being added to, the main page might benefit from a minor modification that recognises that her political views are a little broader than just transgender issues. Something in the line of "she has rendered public commentary on a range of LGBTQ issues with varying reception". Something like this would act as a proper reference for expanded depth in the Article that specifically discusses her political views. It's interesting that the politics page has no coverage of her relatively long running and well covered commentary on gay rights with it's various nuances.Antisymmetricnoise (talk)13:00, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I said something somewhat along those linesin this discussion (where the OP's ideas were most recently discussed), and see my recent commenthere, giving some recommendations as to how it could be included. As for coverage of her long-running and well-covered commentary on gay rights, my guess as to why it has been included is that pages are only as good as their contributors.Historyday01 (talk)13:11, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I have nominated theBella Ramsey page for a good article status that I believe falls within the scope of this WikiProject. I would be very grateful if any editors here could take a look and consider reviewing it. Thanks!Crp74 (talk)08:57, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Right now, this article is a mess in terms of consistency and formatting, and some of the countries weren't even listed in alphabetical order until I fixed them - would anyone be willing to convert it into a consistent table format indicating office held, tenures, party etc? thanksIostn (talk)07:38, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, so far I've finished the sections forAsia andOceania. Let me know your thoughts on the format I put together. Some information, like political party affiliations was a challenge to find because many of these people have no page. I also wonder if it should only be limited to elected officials, or not.Historyday01 (talk) 15:06, 9 November 2025 (UTC) Update: I just finished theSouth America section. Will keep working on this in the coming days.--Historyday01 (talk)19:17, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was assuming that countries were still going to be subdivided under the continent sections (especially when it lumps in countries that dont have much to do with each other culturally or politically), also I think "office held" and "governing body" should be merged togetherIostn (talk)01:38, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would divide it by country, but that could be a problem since some countries only have one trans legislator and others have ten. I suppose office held and governing body could be merged when applicable.Historyday01 (talk) 02:38, 10 November 2025 (UTC) Updated the page, streamlining the entries similar to what I did on my draft page (see the below discussion), but Istrongly oppose redividing it by country. That would not help usersat all.--Historyday01 (talk) 14:48, 10 November 2025 (UTC) Latest update. Finally finished fixing up this page. It was a lot, but it'sfinally done.--Historyday01 (talk)01:27, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think much of the answer to that questions is whether significant reliable sources have done articles on non-binary office holders.
(I will say that part of your problem with table width could be alleviated if, instead of having a separate column for "reference", you just put the reference after the gender ID in the appropriate column.)
I would be happier with it as its own page rather than as part of thenon-binary page, because this is just one field of endeavor and adding all reasonable fields (enbys in the arts, in science, in sports, etc.) would just flood the page of what should be a fairly high-level topic. --Nat Gertler (talk)18:22, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@User:NatGertler, thanks for replying I agree with you on the page being its own. When you say "part of your problem with table width could be alleviated if, instead of having a separate column for "reference", you just put the reference after the gender ID in the appropriate column" could you explain more? I have two charts below following what I think you mean:
Girl is the firstdrag queen elected to public office in the United States.[2] She is a three-time candidate forCalifornia's 30th congressional district and the firstnon-binary person to advance to a general election for a House seat.[3] Girl is non-binary and uses she/her and they/them pronouns.[1]
Girl is the firstdrag queen elected to public office in the United States.[2] She is a three-time candidate forCalifornia's 30th congressional district and the firstnon-binary person to advance to a general election for a House seat.[3] Girl is non-binary and uses she/her and they/them pronouns.[1]
I mean the first of your two examples. If the reference is really for the whole row, it may make sense to put it attached to the name, if it's just for the gender ID, to put it with the gender ID... but to have it just as its own column just makes things wider without adding information, and it doesn't even properly cover cases like your example, where two different references are actually used for different things. I'm not sure it will really even save us width given your high-text column, but at least with fewer columns the text won't have to go so many lines, as you can see in your examples.--Nat Gertler (talk)05:45, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. That could work, but my only concern is if we put references in the Identity column, it could make sorting the identities a problem. However, I could just add it to the "notes" section instead.Historyday01 (talk)13:15, 10 November 2025 (UTC) Update: Here's what that would look like:[reply]
Girl is the firstdrag queen elected to public office in the United States.[2] She is a three-time candidate forCalifornia's 30th congressional district and the firstnon-binary person to advance to a general election for a House seat.[3] Girl is non-binary and uses she/her and they/them pronouns.[1]
That was my thought too. I am in the process of updating the page right now and adding all sorts of new entries, partially thanks to the two articles you shared.Historyday01 (talk)21:58, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good! (Personally, I'd put country next to political party, in part because the same party names are used in multiple countries, in part because "notes" just seems like a far right (tablewise) thing. But it's not a major concern.) --Nat Gertler (talk)15:15, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, that is a good point, but I think the current format works as well. Also, that would push the "identity" column too far right, in the table.Historyday01 (talk)18:29, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is an ongoing RfC atNPOVN on whether gender exploratory therapy should be described as a form of conversion therapy. Editors interested in the issue are welcome to comment.Gitz (talk) (contribs)16:28, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The article onTony Briffa has some things that I think could use more attention from people more knowledgeable than I.
The first is her name, the article currently only mentions her birth name, "Antoinette", in the infobox and in a quote. However, Briffa's website,[3], lists Antoinette first in many places. The "About Tony" sections says: "Although my birth name and legal name is Antoinette Briffa, and I’m better known as Tony Briffa.". From what I understand of Wikipedia's guidelines/practices and Briffa themself, I think the article should stay "Tony Briffa" but lead with something like "Antoinette Briffa, better known asTony Briffa, is...".
The second is if Briffa is non-binary is not. The article used to describe her as non-binary, but I couldn't find anything where she actually says she is, andthis facebook post implies that she does not identify as such. The matter isn't exactly clear though so I felt that it should be brought up here.MRN2electricboogaloo (talk)22:31, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I mentioned it on your talk page, but I think theTimes of Malta article was the one which made me think Tony would be a good fit onthat page. In any case, there should be a section, on some page which notes all the non-binary politicians. Let me copy over what I said there as it may be helpful to other users:
Tony, who lives in Victoria, says she tried to live as a man for a few years despite being born with female genitalia and being raised as a girl. She also tried to live as a genderless or non-binary person but says it was very hard as people generally insisted on using some sort of pronoun.
Okay. I haven't seen those articles, but I think theTimes of Malta one was the source of the confusion. Should we create a section for intersex politicians somewhere, or is the above-mentioned category sufficient?Historyday01 (talk)22:51, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Could someone please change the pronouns referring to Geyser from "her" to "he" and keep an eye to ensure that people does not change it back? I dont have time to do that myself since i need to sleep --Trade (talk)03:56, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've made the pronoun swap (alongside various grammatical fixes). Looks like a recurring target for GENDERID-related edit warring, includingthis edit which accidentally misgendered the Slender Man himself.
Harisu has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to thereassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.Z1720 (talk)04:04, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Home
Talk
Collaboration
Editing
Alerts
Showcase
.svg)
