WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies

Home

Talk

Collaboration

Editing

Resources

Showcase

This is thetalk page for discussingWikiProject LGBTQ+ studies and anything related to its purposes and tasks.

Put new text under old text.Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome!Learn to edit;get help. Assume good faith Be polite andavoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seekdispute resolution if needed Shortcuts WT:LGBTQ+WT:LGBTQ+ WT:LGBTQWT:LGBTQ WT:LGBTQIAWT:LGBTQIA WT:LGBTWT:LGBT

Archives:Index,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80Auto-archiving period:30 days

This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects:

LGBTQ+ studies 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 Gender 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 To-do list: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Assess : seeUnassessed Gender studies articles andUnknown-importance Gender studies articles Cleanup : edit to see Collaborate : see/Collaboration Copyedit : edit to see Deletion sorting : see/Sexuality and gender Expand : edit to see Infobox : seeGender studies articles needing infoboxes Merge : edit to see Notability : edit to see NPOV : edit to see Orphans :Brannon Masculinity Scale ·Holy Virility ·Media and gender ·Michael Kaufman (author) ·Women's education in Saudi Arabia Photo : seeWikipedia requested photographs of gender studies Split :History of feminism Stubs : seeGender studies stubs Translate : see/translation Update : edit to see Verify :Riot grrrl Needs attention : seeGender studies articles needing attention Sexology and sexuality 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

On 6 September 2024, it was proposed that this page bemoved fromWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studies toWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ Studies. The result ofthe discussion wasmoved to Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies.

Reports Alerts Assessment Watchlist Cleanup 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. Watchlist – Shows recent changes to all articles linked fromWP:LGBTQ+/Watchlist. Cleanup – All project-tagged articles with maintenance templates. Bot-updated weekly. Article lists Core Vital Popular Drafts New Core – A collection of 120 articles of fundamental importance to the project's mandate. Vital – Project-tagged articles that have been identified as vital atWP:VITAL. Popular – The 500 most-viewed project-tagged articles. Bot-updated monthly. Drafts – A category containing all project-tagged draft articles. New – Search results for articles that match LGBTQ+ search terms. These may be reviewed to determine if they arein-scope. SeeWP:LGBTQ+/Editing for more.

Collaboration welcome atGays Eating Garlic Bread in the Park!

---Another Believer_(Talk)17:09, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirectList of sexualities has been listed atredirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets theredirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect atWikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 June 9 § List of sexualities until a consensus is reached. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk14:39, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: Multiple redirects included in discussion:

• List of sexual orientations →Sexual orientation  (talk·links·history·stats)
• List of sexualities →Outline of LGBTQ topics  (talk·links·history·stats)
• List of sexualities and gender identities →Outline of LGBTQ topics  (talk·links·history·stats)
• List of gender and sexual identities →Outline of LGBTQ topics  (talk·links·history·stats)
• List of genders and sexualities →Outline of LGBTQ topics  (talk·links·history·stats)

--MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk14:39, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TheNational Center for Lesbian Rights changed its name today to theNational Center for LGBTQ Rights. I'm nervous about doing a page move and would prefer someone else do it;see talk page.Funcrunch (talk)22:56, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looking to revisitthis discussion, for two reasons. Firstly, to get more responses and secondly because one editor deemed the subject matter to be too soon at the time. Please view the link and give your responses below.Helper201 (talk)07:33, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is too soon. I doubt there has been a substantial change in usage in the 6 months since the above discussion, or the <10 months since the series of discussions surrounding the most recent move. I cannot locateTalk:LGBTQ_people#Requested_move_14_August_2024—not sure what happened to the talk page history there. There was follow up discussionhere anda move review and I'm sure other discussions. (I did not participate in any of these and became aware of the history more recently while participating in a related RM.) Unless there is evidence of a substantial change in usage or a new set of arguments that have not been properly considered, I'm not sure there will be a different outcome.Ngram is still only updated through 2022 and showsLGBTQ with a substantial lead and trending upwards. I will be surprised if the update with the 2023 corpus showsLGBTQ+ in the lead but it will be a useful data point. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk22:27, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Now located atTalk:LGBTQ (term)/Archive 4#Requested move 14 August 2024. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (talk • stalk)23:08, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Would it make sense to list these here in an FAQ or similar? Although these discussions and decisions occur on and impact other pages, it's a perennial topic. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk00:25, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, moving them to LGBTQ took a long time, so I would be hesitant for that reason, plus the reasoning that you put forward.Historyday01 (talk)00:11, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No need.Zenomonoz (talk)00:24, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This SPA could use more attention from someone with more patience than me. (I started the article FWIW.)Funcrunch (talk)15:56, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like an issue forWP:COI/N. I responded to the above editor on their talk page. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk20:19, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion is atTalk:List of animated series with LGBTQ characters: 2010–2014#Should polyamorous characters be added?. Your comments would be appreciated.Historyday01 (talk)13:27, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Already planning to do some copy-editing for tone and grammar but it's written from a very US-centric perspective. Can definitely see space for discussion of theatre in the Weimar Republic but that's far from all it needs.Carlodivarga-s (talk)17:07, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I jumped in and did some copyediting, consolidation of info, and removed some non-relevant examples, but it definitely still needs a lot of work. Good catch on bringing this to folks' attention.ForsythiaJo (talk)22:57, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I started a very rough draft for the termbutch as used in gay male subculture. I hope the sources provided thus far are indicative of the article's intended scope, which is different thanbutch (lesbian slang). I welcome others to chip in. Happy pride!Wracking ^talk!05:19, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think more eyes are neededover there. An editor who is more willing to edit war than those who disagree is removing content as 'unsourced' over a differing interpretation of the existing sources, while rejecting new sources on shaky grounds.ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPantsTell me all about it.12:22, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please keep notices of relevant discussions neutrally worded, in line withWP:CANVASS.--Trystan (talk)14:23, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There weren't any sources cited, though that's beeen remedied to a degree and you continue to ignore LFB. But hey, canvas away...Molikog (talk)14:33, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You removed a claim from the lead. The sources were in the body. You were shown multiple other sources, as well...ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPantsTell me all about it.14:40, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The claim in the lead is not in the body. THe multiple other sources were all inadequate.Molikog (talk)15:37, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• To be fair, at least gender essentialism and whether it qualifies as hate speech isn't actually covered outside the lead. The function of the lead in summarizing the body doesn't change depending on whether the subject is controversial.GMG^talk15:54, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Gender essentialism is a different (if related) subject. For this particular term, the second citation (From Dogwhistles to Bullhorns: Unveiling Coded Rhetoric with Language Models) explicitly includes this term in a list of examples of what it repeatedly refers to as 'hate speech'. It also explicitly refers to the term as "transphobic". I did add a more direct reference, but the complaints haven't stopped.ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPantsTell me all about it.16:42, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Not really saying anything about whether it's verifiable. Just saying it's not covered in the body.GMG^talk16:46, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Ahh, I misread your comment as being about the sources. However, there's a quote at the end of the 'Adoption by anti-trans movements' subsection that refers to it as "hatred" already. (And I mean, simply having a section on that pretty strongly implies it.)

  FWIW, I'm planning on expanding on these points soon here, as finding sources to support these 'contentious' statements in the lead was trivial, and there's content to be made from those sources that could improve the article.ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPantsTell me all about it.16:59, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  That's a heavy burden to put on the Liverpool city council.GMG^talk17:25, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I've no sympathy for them. They accepted the risk when they ran for office^[FBDB].

  In all seriousness, that might not be (anywhere near) the best sourcing for it, but itwas in the body, and itwas supported by a source on the claim itself. Between those facts, the justification for removal was shaky at best and dishonest at worst.

  I'm actually a big fan of formatting the lead to summarize the body. However, with many shorter articles (such as this one), the lead is the only real place to put certain statements which might be supported by the sourcing but aren't explicit in the body. Indeed, many articles arenothing but lead.

  And when one encounters claims in the lead that aren't reflected in the body, butare supported by sourcing in the body (or are so trivially easy to find sources for as this), removing them from the lead only damages the article. Adding them to the body improves it.ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPantsTell me all about it.17:44, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't think we get to play fast and loose with the lead when it's convenient. What it looks like from here is two sides crossing their arms and and telling the other to fix the issue.GMG^talk19:07, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  If that's what you see, you haven't checked the edit history.ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPantsTell me all about it.19:36, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear friends.

I just published a translation from PL into EN ofRainbow Friday article. English is my second language, feel free to look it over and change the language.

Also, I need to add translation template I think?

Best wishes!

--Kaworu1992 (talk)12:51, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Friends.

I just translated an article about the clubLe Madame from Polish into English. If somebody could check my English and do other stuff with the article (I dunno how to add a short summary :-( ) I would be grateful.

Best wishes

--Kaworu1992 (talk)15:24, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I took a look at both! I will note that inLe Madame, there is currently no explicit mention of the club as a meeting site for LGBTQ people in the article. Also, the lead (first section) includes information that is not otherwise in the article. More info is available atMOS:INTRO, but essentially the lead should summarize the main points of the article and not include lots of extra information not in the body.

Great work, and happy pride!Wracking ^talk!01:59, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hm... it is "just" a translation. Maybe if I will find some free time (honestly, I am more focused now on translating a lot of LGBT articles than improving them) I could look for resources on the Polish Internet (I believe I have a subscription of Wyborcza Classic??? That's a great archive of Polish news), but for now my priorities are kind of different?

Maybe I will try do something about that after the Pride Month is over? If I will not forget, it is...

Best wishes!

--Kaworu1992 (talk)12:27, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Friends.

I translated from Polish Wikipedia article about magazineInaczej. Please, look at it and do some language and Wikipedia editing, if you could? ;-) English is a second speech for me, you know... :-P ;-)

Best wishes!

--Kaworu1992 (talk)12:29, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Kaworu1992 Thanks for creating this new entry! You can always request a copy edit from the Guild of Copy Editors here:Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests. Can be very helpful! ---Another Believer_(Talk)17:25, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Please note thatModern Pagan views on LGBT people, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of theArticles for improvement. The article isscheduled to appear on Wikipedia'sCommunity portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by—MusikBottalk00:08, 16 June 2025 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team[reply]

I just saved this from being deleted. Please keep an eye out for potential deletions duringPride Month. This one seems to have been an inadvertent proposed deletion; an editor is proposing deletion of many poorly sourced geographical stubs.Bearian (talk)02:00, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Toadspikewrote:There's a new pilot program open atWikipedia:Resource support pilot, where editors can submit requests for the WMF to buy sources for them.Polygnotus (talk)00:48, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Friends.

I translated an article aboutReplika (Polish magazine) from PL into EN. As usual, I am not that competent about categories and other Wikipedia stuff, plus EN is my second language. Please, feel free to improve the article and my language.

Best wishes!

--Kaworu1992 (talk)16:49, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For example, in this template it shows many redirects:

Comparing with this:

Ninixed (talk)19:16, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My question is: is it worth it to create new redirects?Ninixed (talk)19:16, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a strong opinion on whether it's worth it, but if done, it might be appropriate to put in a request atWP:AWB/Tasks rather than manually creating dozens of redirects.Wracking ^talk!05:50, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion that may be of interest to this noticeboard:Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:BZPN/Right to hold dissenting views about social issues without malice

It is about the essayUser:BZPN/Right to hold dissenting views about social issues without malice which opens withThis essay is written in response to concerns about whether it is acceptable for a Wikipedia user to respectfully express disagreement with certain aspects of LGBT-related policies or ideologies, particularly in relation to same-sex marriage or adoption, without engaging in hate speech or personal attacks.Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk)23:54, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Hetero Awesome Fest

Discussion participation and article improvements welcome ---Another Believer_(Talk)13:43, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, so I've just created the page forMichel Antoine, and while digging into the archives about him, I noticed that the police referred to him using terms that seem to indicate a sexual orientation different from the social and moral norms of the time (probably homosexual?). For example, he's described as having 'tastes contrary to nature' and 'poor morality' when the police address these matters.(1) Furthermore, he never married, had no children and has no source about any romantic/sentimental relationship with a woman or nobody in fact in his entire life. On the page you can also see that when Grave describes him, he says he had 'strange manners' of a 'priest mixed with a little girl' or something like this - which is maybe something related to his gender identity that Grave wouldn't have understood ? However, all of this is difficult to source directly, but I was wondering if you integrate these types of profiles into the project at all, which are not sourced but like probable I would say like it's not unfair to assume this I feel like ? If so, please feel free, if not, no worries and good luck.Aristoxène (talk)09:49, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will add his texts to WS soon, and it's possibly related to sexual freedom and related subjects for some of them at least (not sure), so maybe with that it will reinforce the link to the project also.Aristoxène (talk)09:50, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're onto something.Be bold,Aristoxène!Bearian (talk)06:52, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I added it, and if someone has a problem with it, then they will be known (so far, nothing). Thanks for your help and attention and sorry for not having responded, I forgot a bit haha (sorryyy)Aristoxène (talk)22:14, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to bring this to GA. I'll be working on it over the summer.Bearian (talk)06:50, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just created an article forDiana Oh who recently died. It may be of interest to members of this project.Thriley (talk)17:41, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently an ongoing RfC that contributors to this project may be interested in weighing in on, listed atTalk:Quentin Crisp#RFC - Pronoun use. This topic did receive some talk page discussion in 2022, but with no firm consensus. As such, this discussion popped up again two days ago before the page was admin-locked, and a formal RfC was opened by the intervening admin.SmittenGalaxy|talk!03:25, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's an important discussion on whether we can use the{{Infobox television}} template on theRevolutionary Girl Utena article. The relevant discussion can be found atTalk:Revolutionary Girl Utena#Template discussion. Input from project members would be very much appreciated. Thanks,Lord Sjones23 (talk -contributions)00:11, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kris (Deltarune) 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 thediscussion page. Thank you. 00:14, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

Philippe I, Duke of Orléans 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)01:11, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently an ongoing RfC that contributors to this project may be interested in atTalk:James Barry (surgeon)#Request for comment: Pronouns 2 (reopening the discussion)Sock-the-guy (talk)21:52, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Project-Class LGBTQ+ studies pages
• WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies articles
• NA-Class Gender studies pages
• NA-importance Gender studies pages
• WikiProject Gender studies articles
• Project-Class Sexology and sexuality pages
• NA-importance Sexology and sexuality pages
• WikiProject Sexology and sexuality articles
• Wikipedia pages with to-do lists

• Wikipedia move-protected talk pages