Talk:Agatha Barbara

message: I've read in a recent book by Chetcuti, "Queer Mediterranean Memories", that Barbara may have been gay. Can anyone help with finding out more and confirming whether it is or is not the case? Contaldo80 (talk) 16:15, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: But should we really have her in the category if it's just a claim of one book? If she, or family, does/did not claim it could the living relatives feel this is mislabeling?--T. Anthony (talk) 06:13, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: But the problem is that if it is not labelled as LGBT then we are effectively making the claim that she was heterosexual/ straight. And I can't find any sources I'm afraid that state that clearly. So I suggest we go with the one that at least gives us something - unless you can find a counter source? And really - should we actually care about "living relatives"? Contaldo80 (talk) 08:11, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Is not labeling as LGBT necessarily meaning straight? And yeah we should care about people.--T. Anthony (talk) 00:52, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you perhaps suggesting that she was asexual? Interesting. Would happily add that as a category if you can find a source. Would be wrong to label her as heterosexual otherwise, it could give offence to her friends and family. Contaldo80 (talk) 08:22, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I was too hesitant before. As I understand Wikipedia, and I've been here like seven years, putting an LGBT category on is supporting an assertion. Not putting one on, however, does not mean we are supporting the idea they're straight or asexual. It can simply mean we don't know. That James Buchanan or Cary Grant have no LGBT category is not an assertion they were straight. It's just we don't know enough to categorize them. (Although I see both are in an LGBT Wikiproject, going by their talk pages, and that might make sense for this woman even if we're uncertain of her orientation. Maybe that could be a compromise?) I think you're potentially being "too cute" with this, but I'll leave the category on.--T. Anthony (talk) 22:45, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

text: Also I guess they found letters by her to a man that were deemed "romantic" by some so I added that. I don't really know which way she was, or whether she was bi even, and I think the letters could be read as just a strong friendship. Still "romantic" is in the source and there's enough uncertainty on the matter to not justify categorization as lesbian IMO.--T. Anthony (talk) 04:28, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The comments about Paul the Apostle and Preca are irrelevant. And are you a Roman Catholic priest? Contaldo80 (talk) 10:48, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm Catholic, but not a priest. The real issue I feel this one source is insufficient as the writer appears to be neither historian nor really a noted biographer. He does not have an article in any Wikipedia. She is not in LGBT categories in other Wikis I've checked and there are reports she was attracted to a man. As a compromise I'm removing the lesbian category, but keeping the LGBT one. If you have a problem with this you can take it to arbitration.--T. Anthony (talk) 07:23, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Lesbians could never write "romantic letters" to an airman right? Contaldo80 (talk) 16:27, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: And she can't be bi because? Look I compromised. I was going to take off all the LGBT things as I don't think it's a well-sourced claim and your "taking it off means saying she's straight" notion doesn't even fit how this place works. Show me that this book counts as a reliable source or take it to some dispute resolution deal or whatever.--T. Anthony (talk) 16:29, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The source looks perfectly reliable to me. Do you have another source that states unequivocally that she was heterosexual? If so then by all means add it to the article and we can re-categorise. Or is the assumption that all people are heterosexual without evidence, and lesbianism/ bisexuality requires sourced evidence? Sounds like double standards to me. Contaldo80 (talk) 16:37, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The source looks to be a book published by Lygon Street Legal Services which is the law firm Mr. Chetcuti works at. And not categorizing as LGBT does not mean categorizing as straight. WP:LGBT--T. Anthony (talk) 16:39, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: And? Contaldo80 (talk) 16:42, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

text: Look up what counts as RS. If others agree this counts I'll demure. But it sounds potentially close to self-publishing if it was published by his law firm.--T. Anthony (talk) 16:47, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

text: I will return it to what you wish, as you have maybe more experience on Malta articles, but I do think it's questionable this book counts as RS. Furthermore For a dead person, there must be a verified consensus of reliable published sources that the description is appropriate. Historically, LGBT people often did not come out in the way that they commonly do today, so a person's own self-identification is, in many cases, impossible to verify by the same standards that would be applicable to a contemporary BLP. For a dead person, a broad consensus of academic and/or biographical scholarship about the topic is sufficient to describe a person as LGBT. Wikipedia:Categorization/Ethnicity, gender, religion and sexuality I do not feel this one book is a "broad consensus" even if it is about the only source on her sexuality. So even though I'm withdrawing I hope my issues will be considered. (For the record I'm not saying she was not a lesbian. I'm saying I don't see a consensus on her sexuality.)--T. Anthony (talk) 16:59, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I'll show good will. Let's drop the lesbian tag. Contaldo80 (talk) 09:37, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  LGBT? 

message: :I have concerns on whether this is being properly categorized, if the source is reliable, etc. I haven't done this for awhile so I hope it's okay.--T. Anthony (talk) 17:05, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: If you're asking if this page should be categorized under biographies and politics, I would have to agree that it is under the right categorization. Fraulein451 (talk) 16:52, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

text: This RFC is confusing. What is that you are seeking input on? -  Cwobeel (talk) 01:08, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: RfC