Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies

(Redirected from Wikipedia talk:LGBT)
Latest comment: 1 day ago by Bearcat in topic LGBT-relatedness of a film
WikiProject

LGBT studies
Home HomeTalk TalkCollaboration CollaborationEditing EditingResources ResourcesShowcase Showcase

WikiProject iconLGBT studies Project‑class
WikiProject iconThis page 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.
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

I want to improve the LGBT_speculative_fiction category lists

edit

Hi, I just added suggestions for a couple of useful new subcategories to Category_talk:LGBT_speculative_fiction - I just wanted to make sure somebody sees this.

(I'm currently researching queer representation in geeky genres for an annotated recommendations list over on IMDb, so I have a list and I'm perfectly happy to put in the time to add the category tags to the individual media pages. But I don't know how to create subcategories - and in any case, that shouldn't be done by an outsider, I think.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:9E8:1ED0:3500:4886:EC7D:A008:E793 (talk)

Rewrite of Transvestic fetishism

edit

A recent rewrite by an unregistered user introduced, in my view, a number of WP:SYNTH issues regarding the scope of "fetishism" and serious WP:FRINGE issues by uncritically citing Ray Blanchard. I don't have the on-wiki bandwidth right now to fully sort this out, so could someone else please take a look, check if my revert was sound, and, if so, see if there's anything salvageable from what I did revert? Thanks. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 03:59, 28 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

This "rewrite" appears to have been an attempt to create a WP:POVFORK of crossdressing. Flounder fillet (talk) 18:01, 28 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Good revert, massive WP:OR and WP:SYNTH issues and a transparent WP:POVFORK. The edits were to add 100s of citations to WP:QUACKS like Zucker, Lawrence, and Blanchard, and, to complete WP:FRINGE group bingo, even included Genspects podcast interviewing Lawrence.[1] Nothing from there seems particularly salvageable. Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 19:15, 28 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
I am reading this and it seems okay to me for what it is.
My own view is that this fetish only manifests in cultures where people are unaware of what LGBT+ means. This information is for cultures where people can observe same-sex erotic behavior and have no concept of "gay", and where if anyone described the concept of transgender to them then it would be a new idea for which they lack words to describe. People like this quit existing in the United States and Internet-connected world some decades ago.
The part about the article which does not work is that it fails to make clear that this culture does not exist in the developed world at present, and only appears in the non-Internet connected Global Majority. Many of the sources cited here are either decades old or modern publications on past times. I agree with Tamzin that the citations need to be critical to put this information in context, but most of this seems fine to me for describing a common global phenomenon among straight guys who have no idea what "gay" means.
Aside - university libraries change out their books on gender and sexuality about every 5-8 years, which is much more than turnover in other fields. Many go obsolete and get offensive to the next generation quickly. This is been true every generation since the 80s. Bluerasberry (talk) 21:40, 28 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

  You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 30 § Category:Autistic LGBT people. --MikutoH talk! 23:24, 30 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

  You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 26 § Category:Lesbians with disabilities. --MikutoH talk! 23:38, 30 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

RFC at RSN: The Telegraph on trans issues

edit

Hello! There is an RFC at the reliable sources noticeboard regarding a subject relevant to this Wikiproject. Loki (talk) 02:02, 3 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Wiki Loves Pride/2024

edit

Project members are invited to participate in this year's Wiki Loves Pride campaign:

The goal is simple: to create or improve LGBT-related content on Wikipedia and sibling projects.

Happy editing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:35, 3 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Furry fandom?

edit

I don't know if this is the right place for this comment but can someone please clarify how the furry fandom wikipedia article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT+ studies? I understand that a larger percentage of the group identify as LGBT+ compared to the general population yet I am pretty sure people are furries regardless of gender or orientation. The disproportionate representation may simply be due to fewer inhibitions expressing sexual orientation/gender predispositions among members and is indicative that the general population has a higher percentage of LGBT+ members than is currently disclosed. Heterosexual members of the furry fandom are not part of the LGBT+ community. This is a cultural subgroup and not a LGBT+ or gender/sexual orientation subgroup. Drocj (talk) 16:21, 9 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

The standard I usually apply when reviewing additions to or removals from the project's scope (which show up on Wikipedia:LGBT/Quality) is whether the article has a substantial amount of text that is about LGBTQ+ topics. Ordinarily, I would look for a paragraph or more that is relevant (other than for people, as all LGBTQ+ people are in scope by definition). In this case, the relevant content appears to be a single sentence, so I wouldn't oppose removing it from the project's scope.--Trystan (talk) 18:13, 9 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
The only relevant line currently in the article is a statistic (10% genderqueer?) in a long list of similar statistics (ethnicity, religion, etc). I do think the article should probably have more text dedicated to its intersectional communities: the relation between furries and LGBT is long and interesting. Regardless, the other basis to add an article to a WikiProject is simply based on the general interest of the editors. This is not a public-facing thing: if many LGBT-focused editors are interested in how a semi-related community is written about, then that's fine. It also seems fair to me to remove the tag if there's no relevant text in the article, tho. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 11:41, 10 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Okay sorry for reverting my pervious comments they were honestly a bit lazy.
I do want to to throw this out there, the current version of article on the furry fandom is pretty dated and needs a lot of updating.
I should also mention there are a lot of wikipedia articles and sources on the topic that do show a connection between the furry fandom and the LGBT community.CycoMa1 (talk) 15:23, 10 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Yeah, exactly. I mean Helluva Boss, which has a heck ton of LGBTQ+ characters, got a Ursa Major Award (which relates to "furry media, such as video, written works, and comics.") three years in a row, and there are certainly MORE awards than just "Best Anthropomorphic Comic Strip" which we have listed on here, as they have a "Best Dramatic Series" award (there's no page for it yet, but... presently the "Best Dramatic Series" have been awarded to the Helluva Boss episodes "Murder Family", "Loo Loo Land", and "The Circus", along with Beastars, BNA: Brand New Animal, Centaurworld, Aggretsuko, Kipo and the Age of Wonderbeasts, and Odd Taxi. I don't think Beastars, BNA, Odd Taxi, or Aggretsuko had LGBTQ+ characters, but since Helluva Boss and Kipo and the Age of Wonderbeasts did, and I think Centaurworld did (since it got some GLAAD award nominations), perhaps that can be added in to the Furry fandom page as well. I added in some sentences to the "Websites and online communities" section, with this edit, which incorporates what I said in this paragraph.
I did a search and only found the following mentions on the page (prior to my edit), showing it NEEDS to be updated:

In 2021 and 2022, media coverage in Canada and the United States focused on false rumors about litter boxes in schools being provided for furries, which was part of a cultural backlash amplified by conservative and far-right politicians against transgender accommodations in schools...While only 2% of furries identified themselves as transgender, 10% of furries identified themselves as genderqueer/non-binary."

Perhaps some of the articles on Google Scholar, JSTOR, or elsewhere could help expand the page's connection to this project. Historyday01 (talk) 16:14, 10 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Requested move at Talk:Madonna#Requested move 1 June 2024

edit
 

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Madonna#Requested move 1 June 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 11:05, 10 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

"S.A.L.E.M.: The Secret Archive of Legends, Enchantments, and Monsters" at AfD

edit

S.A.L.E.M.: The Secret Archive of Legends, Enchantments, and Monsters has been nominated for deletion, with the discussion here. This page, about a proposed animated series of this name, was previously listed for Wiki Loves Pride in 2021 and 2022. This discussion may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Historyday01 (talk) 00:30, 11 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Requested move at Talk:Fictosexuality#Requested move 13 June 2024

edit
 

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Fictosexuality#Requested move 13 June 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. RodRabelo7 (talk) 08:58, 14 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Britta Curl and trans topics discussion

edit

A discussion about appropriate phrasing and "neutrality" as they relate to transphobia and transgender people is currently occurring at Talk:Britta Curl. The guidance of one or more editors experienced in navigating these topics would be most appreciated, as things seem to be going a bit off the rails.

For context: Britta Curl is an ice hockey player who was recently drafted into to Professional Women's Hockey League. Her selection has been somewhat controversial within the fanbase due to her history of liking and sharing content with conservative views, especially things broadly interpreted as transphobic and trans-exclusionary, on social media platforms. Spitzmauskc (talk) 01:17, 23 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Seconding that this section is painful to read, but I'm not brave enough to wade into whatever is happening on the talk page. Is anyone more experienced able to do so? Sock-the-guy (talk) 00:45, 24 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Korbin Albert

edit

Korbin Albert had liked some allegedly homophobic/transphobic social media posts for which she apologized, and has subsequently been booed during US national team games [2] [3]. This has been covered in significant, independent, reliable sources. However, the Korbin Albert Wikipedia page currently describes this in a way that almost makes it seem as if nothing at all was homophobic/transphobic. I would like someone from this Wiki Project to take a look and ensure that section is written from a neutral point of view. Joeykai (talk) 23:09, 23 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

wow! That was both way too long and also misleading. I've attempted to clean it up a bit, although now the section seems to need more so it's not just a "controversy" section Sock-the-guy (talk) 23:47, 23 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
edit

I just started this list. Did it exist before? Because I couldn't find. There are probably more acronyms missing, but I think these were enough for a start. --MikutoH talk! 21:58, 24 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Sophie (musician)

edit

There's a discussion happening at Talk:Sophie (musician)#Pronouns again that's relevant to this project. The subject of the article was transgender, and editors are revisiting the question of whether the article should use she/her pronouns or avoid third-person pronouns. hinnk (talk) 01:31, 26 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Article needed: Les Veilleurs

edit

French Wikipedia has an article on Les Veilleurs [fr] (lit. 'Watchers'; or 'Sentinels') which is a French conservative movement with anti-lgbt goals similar to La Manif pour Tous. It's definitely a notable topic, and we ought to have an article on it. The French article is well sourced, and appears to be well organized and written. Mathglot (talk) 02:23, 27 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I do see that either the redirect should be deleted or the organization should be described in the article it currently redirects to. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 11:36, 27 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

LGBT-relatedness of a film

edit

In the process of trying to update List of LGBT-related films of 2024 with the films that screened in the past couple of weeks at the Frameline Film Festival, I came across Good One, where the article has already existed for several months but had not been categorized or listed as an LGBT-related film, and I also could not find any sources whatsoever to clarify the matter — so I asked on the talk page, and another editor located a source that passingly states that the protagonist identifies as queer, but otherwise continues to reflect the same lack of evidence that her queerness is particularly central to the main plot.

So I'm of two minds: to me, personally, the fact that a lead character in the film is queer should be enough to warrant categorizing it as an LGBT-related film (queerfolk don't only want to see films where queerness is the drama per se, and do want to also see films in which queer people are just present in the world too), but I can easily see somebody reverting me on the grounds that it isn't "LGBT-related" enough to be defined by that if I tried to add the category myself. It would be much more clearcut that it wasn't particularly significant if a minor character's LGBTQ identity was passingly mentioned without being central to the storyline, but if it's the lead character it's obviously a harder call.

So I wanted to ask for some other opinions as well: if the central character's queerness is mentioned, but the film isn't particularly about her queerness per se, then should it be categorized as LGBT-related or not? Bearcat (talk) 14:09, 27 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I'm going to lean toward "no"; if it were a film that was about them queering about queerily, sure. If review sources and analysis are focusing on that aspect, sure. But if it isn't central, it's just a personal attribute, then yay for inclusion but it doesn't need to be on the list/in the category any more than a film where someone mentions having met someone at church would be "Christian-related film". It's not a defining aspect of the film, which is what we expect for categories. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 14:43, 27 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
An editor was able to find a source that had not turned up for me, which provided significantly greater context than just passingly mentioned it. Bearcat (talk) 14:55, 27 June 2024 (UTC)Reply