Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies/Archive 13

message: Promoted to FA!!! Congratulations to User:Otto4711 and all the others that helped to get it there! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 15:44, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Judy Garland 

message: So I'm new to this gay mafia project, but I was wondering if Kimpton Hotels & Restaurant Group should be added to the project? I'm not sure how many of you are familiar with them, but it's one of the most gay-friendly companies and hotel chains in the country. Look at their website's LGBT section. They do alot of charity work and cater heavily to the LGBT crowd. I know they're popular with the gays here in D.C. I'm not sure if companies are added to the project or not, but I thought I'd check with you guys and gals...and those in between.--AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 06:07, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Go for it! The article has a well-ref'd section regarding LGBT issues. --Phyesalis (talk) 06:20, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.--AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 06:34, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rookie question 

message: I nominated the Christian Wikipedian and American Wikipedia categories for deletion using the same rationale which was used to purge Wikipedia of the Gay Wikipedian categories. Both were speedily closed by admin Jc37 as speedy keeps without any discussion allowed at all. On the face of it, this seems a double standard to me, and I am wondering if anybody has any thoughts on what, if any, action should be taken about it. Personally, I think we should simply start a category titled "LGBT Wikipedians interested in collaborating", and use these speedy keeps as precedent for keeping our category when it is inevitably nominated for deletion. The current LGBT category has a userbox which says, "This user is interested in LGBT issues - which does not necessarily reflect the user's sexual orientation". Unless we can add ourselves to the category without such a disclaimer, I am removing myself from it. Jeffpw (talk) 10:54, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe we should trim down the four paragraphs on :Category:LGBT Wikipedians and add something similar to :Category:Christian Wikipedians.  Just so that category is safe from deletion as well. I'd hate for them to worry about their cat being deleted. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 15:54, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

text: If the userbox says that, then there should be a different userbox that isn't so equivocal. "Wikipedians interested in LGBT issues" is not the name or point of the category. I don't know that trying to delete other categories is constructive, though - I think what you want is to have categories retained on the same basis, and if the categories you nominated are deleted it spells the inevitable deletion of the LGBT Wikipedian category (again). The most powerful argument is that these categories need to be dealt with collectively and not by cherry picking. I'm fine with seeing the intro paras of the category refined or removed, but making this argument and providing some background was my primary motivation for writing it. Avruchtalk 16:03, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's easily fixable with :Category:Wikipedians interested in Gays, :Category:Wikipedians interested in Queers, :Category:Wikipedians interested in Lesbians, :Category:Wikipedians interested in Bisexuals, etc. :P - ✰ALLSTAR✰ echo 16:08, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No offense was intended towards you, Avruch! My point was that we're forced into having a full page of info defending our category, whereas other categories escape CfD speedily.  Perhaps adding the defensive language to the other cat will help people understand the disparity. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 16:42, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Satyr, I don't think the Christians are worried. After all, they have the lord on their side. They've put up with being eaten byb lions, I doubt a category deletion will bother them much...though I predict yet another stunning KEEP result for that malignant devout category. Jeffpw (talk) 16:48, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that transferring the language on isolated deletion to the other similar usercats is a good idea, both in the GF sense and in promoting general parity. LOL, though I agree that the Christians probably aren't too worried. -Phyesalis (talk) 17:13, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  More category puzzles 

message: Bisexuality Not A Transitional Phase Among Women, According To New Research 
Angelina Jolie is taking calls! Benjiboi 01:42, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Something for the Ladies! 

message: I was reading Alone in the Trenches: My Life As a Gay Man in the NFL by Esera Tuaolo, which is very moving by the way, a good read. I am active in St. Louis Rams WikiProject and a general fan of the NFL and I thought I would see if there is an article about homosexuality in the NFL or in sports in general. The only one I saw was Homosexuality in women's sports‎. Would any be interested in or find notable to have an article about homosexuality in sports in general? Or even homosexuality in the National Football League? --Pinkkeith (talk) 17:50, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't forget Ray McDonald (running back). -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 06:39, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

text: The lesbian article is just begging for a sports section to be added. It would be more of a summary but might be a good place to start. Benjiboi 18:23, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Homosexuality in figure skating is just begging to be created and heavily vandalized.  Kolindigo (talk) 22:05, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Gay Olympians could be a timely article and also heavily vandalized, perhaps we could develop a tour for vandals? Benjiboi 04:11, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "And on your left, you will find premium flaming ground for both homosexuals and athletes you can't stand. On your right, the Washington Monument. Please watch your step." Kolindigo (talk) 07:21, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Homosexuality in sports 

message: FYI on a WP:COI Noticeboard debate involving User:David Shankbone and the Michael Lucas (porn star) article in: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Michael Lucas (porn star). — Becksguy (talk) 02:27, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Michael Lucas (porn star) COI 

message: This article is up for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paddock Club, with the reasoning "Non-notable. Kill it with fire." Pairadox (talk) 00:48, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going to take a look at it and see if I can tidy it up so deletion won't occur. I lived in Greenville for a while and I want to keep the article.--AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 04:10, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There's already been a good bit added to the article that seems to have given this article a bit of a firmer foundation. I'm especially proud of finding the Playboy's "best place to pick up chicks" bit... You can't make stuff like that up. The AfD was closed because of the nominator's track record, but the article still needs some work. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 20:12, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Suggestions?--AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 20:25, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: FWIW: Most of the article is still reads as someone's fond remembrances, though recent cleanup has hidden that a bit. This leaves a good bit of the article completely unsourced as well. Additionally, having the article orphaned is never a good thing: orphans tend to get pruned off every now and again. - Mdsummermsw (talk)  —Preceding comment was added at 20:44, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I'll try to work on it some more...after I eat this delicious pint of strawberry cheesecake heaven I purchased this afternoon. That's right, don't be jealous. (FYI: APK is a sweets addict and stops all activities to enjoy his sugary habit) AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 20:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Paddock Club]] 

message: Is he worthy of an article?  He's Andrew Sullivan's husband, but also an artist and sometimes actor. Thoughts?--AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 09:43, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I take that as a no. Anyway, it looks like Teddy couldn't rid himself of his gay affliction. AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 22:24, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aaron Tone 

message: *See User:Hyacinth/User categories (talk) - — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hyacinth (talk • contribs) 23:45, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  User categories 

message: The AfD for Harlequin (color) has been closed as no consensus.  Since the article is staying at least for now, does anyone know of a reliable source for its association with homosexuality?  The original source was not very strong, and has long since been removed.  Or, should we just remove our project tag from the talk page? Aleta (Sing) 01:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I may have hit the jackpot!  Take a look at this - and Moni3, Gittings is mentioned in the very first paragraph, so take a look at that! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 08:17, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, that blog isn't citeable for this, and doesn't explicitly mention harlequin at all, but it does point to some good possibilities for material that would be citeable.  Even if it doesn't mention harlequin specifically, there may be some stuff worthy of adding to the articles for green and kelly green, possibly other shades. Aleta (Sing) 17:04, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry - I didn't mean that was (in itself) an RS - but it has references to a whole host of sources that look RS.  And I'm hoping some of those will mention the color by name or lead to a source that does. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 17:10, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I'm sorry - I didn't think you were saying you thought the blog entry a RS, but were happy about the references there, and I was trying to agree with you! :) Aleta (Sing) 17:18, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: /me happy dances at Aleta :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 17:21, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: LOL Aleta (Sing) 17:24, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Harlequin (color)]] encore 

message: Should we add Bonobo to the project?  Bonobos are known for their sexual behavior, including both male and female homosexual behavior.  The article talks about this - see in particular Bonobo#Sexual social behavior.  So, LGBT project? Aleta (Sing) 23:20, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, qualifies as material related to LGBT and Queer studies. --Phyesalis (talk) 00:07, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I've added it now.  I thought it should be, but wanted to hear from someone else. Aleta (Sing) 00:15, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Um.  Does that mean we have to add all these? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 00:19, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think so; however, the bonobo is particularly noted for its sexual social behaviors.  (They use sex all the time!) Aleta (Sing) 00:22, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bonobo 

message: Allstar, would you make the view and edit links separate, so that you can go to the editing screen directly from the page on which you're viewing the template? Aleta (Sing) 20:38, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried that but for some reason it wouldn't work. I'll work on it and see what's causing the issue. - ✰ALLSTAR✰ echo 20:41, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, thanks! Aleta (Sing) 20:59, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've implemented a temporary work around so that the edit link goes right to editing. I've got to find the code for getting to editing using direct wikilink instead of formatting to a full URL as I have it now. I remember seeing the code, just have to find it. For now, it still works. - ✰ALLSTAR✰ echo 21:02, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Better Aleta? - ✰ALLSTAR✰ echo 22:22, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good! Thanks, ASE! Aleta (Sing) 22:27, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggestion/request

message: I don't know if many of you watch Homosexual transsexual, but there's a discussion on its talk page that might benefit from a greater diversity of viewpoints (i.e., yours!).  The primary question is whether to include an image in the article.  Thanks,  WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:37, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cooler heads 

message: First off, kudos to Moni - that rocks! Secondly, I was wondering what everyone thought about regularly posting award requests over at the WP:REWARD  board and User:The Transhumanist/Award Center, like making it a regular project task. LGBT barnstars will increase the project's visibility as well as encourage article improvement. The reward board will encourage inter-project collaboration, or just collaboration. Thoughts? --Phyesalis (talk) 22:26, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: On the subject of cross-promotion

message: There is an issue at stake here . I'm not sure why sports should hold more sway than the LGBT society...Zigzig20s (talk) 21:25, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  LGBT society... 

message: You may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jay Brannan. - ✰ALLSTAR✰ echo 20:47, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: He could be less miserable if he actually worked *with* us rather than simply complaining. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 21:34, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

text: I still say JzG/Guy should not have removed the content while the article is fully protected and then turn around and nom the article for deletion. That was foul. - ✰ALLSTAR✰ echo 21:58, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I dunno - per BLP, that's about right.  It'll get sorted out - and Guy's going through some stuff, so my opinion is to cut some slack. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:12, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

text: fyi- The photograph of Jay Brannan is also up for deletion at Wikimedia Commons at the request of Brannan, who claims to hold the copyright. It was uploaded from Flickr were it is licensed under an CCA license.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by Queerudite (talk • contribs) 04:13, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Jay Brannan]] 

message: This page is a disaster as of now.Zigzig20s (talk) 13:28, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: For some reason someone's translating it or something, and there's now a transclusion of the French/English translation mix.  I don't know what's going on with that, and I don't know how to fix it, but it makes the article FUBAR. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 15:05, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Radical Faeries]] 

message: I've noticed there is now a template to edit when one wants to add a recently tagged or created article germane to our project. It takes longer to type in - why was this changed? I wouldn't mind getting back to the old layout.Zigzig20s (talk) 13:29, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: For why, see above section, #Templating sections. Aleta (Sing) 17:35, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it takes longer.Zigzig20s (talk) 17:42, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You know you can just hit the "e" on the top left of any of those sections and you're editing the template, just like before? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 18:19, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I know, that's what I did. It takes longer - or so it seems. Maybe because the "e" is smaller.Zigzig20s (talk) 18:24, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: How does it take longer? You just click the 'e' and you're there. *blinks* - ✰ALLSTAR✰ echo 19:15, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Cos it's smaller..Zigzig20s (talk) 19:39, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  recently tagged/newly added articles 

message: In the earlier help thread, I asked a few questions together, and some went unanswered - lost in the mix, most likely.  So, I'd like to ask again:
# In relation to the whole Rick Pantera situation there have actually been two porn stars using that name - the one we have, and a more recent one who did some work for COLT.  I have no idea about the work of either, and thus whether the second one meets notability, etc.  If they do, we'll need a disambiguation page, and I don't know how to make one.  Benjiboi also suggested "maybe even moving the current one so it's clear which is which Rick Pantera (porn actor 2000s) maybe?"  Thoughts?  Assistance?
#* I don't have any idea if the new one is notable by WP:N, WP:BIO, or WP:PORNBIO.  If not, then a short note in the current Pantera's article should be plenty.  If the new one is notable, we should move the current and make a disambig page.
# I also think that some disambiguation is needed in relation to the porn star Joe Foster.  I was here and noticed Joe Foster (performer of the year) had a page.  But, the page Joe Foster is a redirect to Slaughter Joe about a British musician, and I am pretty sure these are different people!  Should the Joe Foster page be for the porn star, with a disambiguation link at the top for the musician?  Or, should the Joe Foster page be a disambiguation page that links to both?  Or, should the link from the GayVN Awards page just be removed?  Or...?  I'm confused.  Would someone who knows what they are doing help please?
#* I think we just need to change the link.  I'll take care of that one.
Thanks in anticipation.  Jay*Jay (talk) 17:51, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help, Mk II 

message: I've copied this from my talk page.  Does anyone here have an interest in either Psychotherapy and/or German?
Hy SatyrTN, i saw that in the english wikipeda is missing a very important article over Gay Affirmative Psychotherapy. On german wikipedia we have a good article and here is the literature. So i can try to translate that article, but you have to look for that article because my english translation isn' t so perfect for correct psycholocial specific terms. In only found in english wikipedia an article over the wrong and old Reparative therapy, where the Gay Affirmative Psychotherapy is only a part of the article. GLGermann (talk) 01:36, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll be glad to keep an eye on it and make corrections, once it is translated. Haiduc (talk) 11:33, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Gay Affirmative Psychotherapy]] ([[de:Gay Affirmative Psychotherapy]]) 

message: I have been working on a few articles "Love Won Out", "Exodus International", "Focus on the Family", and then sub pages such as "Joe Dallas", "John Paulk", Dr. "Joseph Nicolosi", and still need to do "Mike Haley." These articles are concerning the Religiouse Right movement to stop homosexuality and cure them of their disease restoreing a more godly and normal lifestyle.  It is my goal to provide factual truth as to what these organizations represent, who their founders are and the contriversy surrounding them.  I would greatly appreciate any help being offered.  Also, editing and rating such articles relating to this movement.
"Love Won Out" has already been awarded a class "B" rating, some improvements have been made but I would enjoy seeing a "GA" rating in the future.  The content is well cited but I am sure there are plenty of grammatical and spelling errors throughout the article.
"Focus on the Family" is the original point where I started and eventually broke "Love Won Out" into its own article, I still want some facts to be a parallel bridge but I am sure someone can improve on the links.  This should have a LGBT Start rating because a lot of work should be done.
The various people listed are all involved in the ex gay movement and should have brief autobiographies posted or improved on.
**Remember these organizations are not friends of the LGBT community but deserve fair representation of their ideology's and beliefs.  Of course that means iterating the controversy behind them as well.
Nycutiepi (talk) 18:52, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ex-gay movement 

message: Hi there, it seems this article is up for deletion. This seems a bit strange to me as it is a really big deal in Sweden (amongst gays anyway). I know sod all about writing articles but I do speak Swedish. If anyone wants to save this from deletion then let me know and I'll translate whatever you need.
Intesvensk (talk) 00:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mr Gay Sweden 

message: I've removed the prod from this article, because I found a review of her work in Canadian Literature.  I added a reference to that, and will be trying to find some more RS to add.  It definitely needs more refs, or is likely to go up on AfD. Aleta (Sing) 22:10, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hm.  I put the prod up. A review of her work isn't quite the same as "significant coverage in multiple reliable sources independent of the subject".  Go for it - my research on Google was less-than-convincing, though :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:17, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I know it's just one thing, but I thought it was enough of a start to pull off the prod.  I hope (but am not certain) that I can find more.  If not, AfD away! :D Aleta (Sing) 22:22, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm... she seems to be published all over the place, and lots of blogs talk about her, but I'm not finding much more that would constitute an independent RS for WP. Aleta (Sing) 00:56, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Leah Lakshmi Piepzna-Samarasinha]] 

message: I got an email today addressed to Dear User of Wikipedia, claiming to be from the OECD Development Centre www.oecd.org/dev. They were inviting involvement in a gender equality wiki site, www.wikigender.org (which appears to require login to view). I suspect from the wording that they're interested in equality between male and female and not the slightest bit interested in transgender issues. I'm wondering if others have received similar emails. --AliceJMarkham (talk) 01:56, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the first I've heard of it. Aleta (Sing) 02:32, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

text: I just clicked your link, and got the login box as well.  I'm not about to try to register for a page for which I can't even see an initial screen.  I tried googling on wikigender and wikigener.org: neither had any results. Aleta (Sing) 02:35, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I got the same email: Dear User of Wikipedia, You have created or modified an article related to “gender equality”. We would like to inform you that the OECD Development Centre (www.oecd.org/dev) has recently introduced a new wiki-based Internet platform exclusively focused on gender equality, called Wikigender (www.wikigender.org). If you are interested in joining this initiative and sharing your knowledge with other experts of gender equality, please contact us at contact@wikigender.org. We look forward to hearing from you soon. The OECD Wikigender Team is what mine said. - ✰ALLSTAR✰ echo 02:37, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's odd...but I'm not about to register for a site before viewing...If someone does, let us know what it's about. AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 02:38, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Additionally, I don't recall having edited any "gender equality" articles. Could have been during my vandal patrol, but nothing on purpose. - ✰ALLSTAR✰ echo 02:41, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

text: I got that e-mail as well. At least it's an unusual form of article-related spam. No one's calling me names. ;) Kolindigo (talk) 03:55, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I got the exact same email. I didn't edit a "gender equality" article, but I have edited some gender studies related articles. It said if your interested in an account to email them back and I did. We'll see what happens, if anything.  --Grrrlriot (talk) 17:24, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikigender 

message: Someone has removed the referenced part about homosexuality AGAIN, as per  - well this shows my putting it back.Zigzig20s (talk) 10:23, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I left a message for the user that removed it. AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 10:37, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Yeshayahu Leibowitz]] 

message: Just came across this and figured some of you may be interested: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language#Coming out euphemisms - ✰ALLSTAR✰ echo 03:05, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ref desk 

message: Brought on by some controversy at Calpernia Addams, as she requested her article be deleted, the result of which was to keep it (as she is notable, & a public person).  Part of her stated reasons was that "birth name" for transpeople is a trickier subject than for people like Bill Clinton (Blythe) & Marilyn "Norma Jean" Monroe.  Which is a fair point.  Is there a forum to discuss the subject of "born as" & such ilk, & if not, should we create one?  --mordicai. (talk) 17:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It needs to follow WP:BLP closely.  If multiple reliable sources can be found linking the current name of the person with the person's  birth name, then we can state.  If not, then we absolutely should not.  Ideally, we would have something where the person stated, "X was my birth name". We are not, however, in the business of outing people. Aleta (Sing) 21:16, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd recommend we go with MOS:IDENTITY on this rather than WP:BLP.  There are always birth-records, which are WP:V, but if a transgender person wishes to go by the name "Tomb Thumb", we should respect that more than the government's pieces of paper. You're right, Aleta, that if someone says "Sam was my name, but now I'm Tomb Thumb", that's about the only time we should be bringing in birth names. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 21:47, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, I'd forgotten about that.  It even specifically addresses how to write about transgendered people.  It doesn't, however, comment on whether or not even to mention other names, and so I'd say we need to use it and BLP, neither one being sufficient alone.  I agree with you, Satyr, that we ought not to be using birth records.  I was trying to emphasize the use of multiple sources, and should have specified published (not just governmental). Whatever policies we reference, I think we basically agree on the practice. :) Aleta (Sing) 22:17, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, I'm certainly glad to become aware of MOS:IDENTITY; good.  Still, the question does remain whether such information is notable & worthy of inclusion.  I am sort of inclined to think that it might be, under biographical information, especially given the aegis of MOS:IDENTITY to keep the article from becoming becoming "I gotcha!" or anything gross.  --mordicai. (talk) 16:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Using a "heightened" WP:BLP standard would seem to apply: 1. Is the information widely known and 2. We have multiple WP:RS's reporting that info. Until both of those have been met I'm reluctant to add that information especially if the subject has shown a desire for privacy in that area. People are routinely targeted, threatened, attacked and killed for such accusations, suspicions and revealations and we should take great care not to add to someone's victimization. Benjiboi 02:10, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Birth name" for Transgendered people 

message: I have posted this comment to the Biographies of living persons project page. It addresses difficulties in updating an article for performer Heather Alexander who now performs as Alexander James Adams. I believe the current article for Heather Alexander can be used as a model for editing biographical articles of others who transition. It would be nice if the LBGT project could weigh in on the current lack of guidelines with regards to transgender individuals, and provide constructive suggestions on what such guidelines should include. Thanks! TechBear (talk) 14:50, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biography guidelines for transgender people of note 

message: Hello. Not sure where to announce this but I've nominated :Category:Christian LGBT people for renaming. See Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2008_February_23#Category:Christian_LGBT_people. Thank you. Pichpich (talk) 16:02, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I notice that a few people from this project have contributed.  FYI, I have proposed a rename to :category:LGBT Christians for consistency with :category:LGBT Jews and :category:LGBT Muslims, which you might like to consider. Jay*Jay (talk) 05:56, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  CfR 

message: Our first openly trans reporter was given resounding accreditation on Wikinews:  http://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Wikinews:Accreditation_requests&oldid=583355#NicholasTurnbull]. --David Shankbone 04:09, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Awesome!!  Is there an LGBT project on WN? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:46, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Yes, it could use help.  Although I don't know why I don't see my Augusten Burroughs interview.  We need news!  --David Shankbone 06:00, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikinews news:  First Trans Reporter 

message: I...just...wet...myself. I'm sorry to get off-topic, but I thought everyone in this project would get a kick out of this video. It's a response to this popular video. Ok, I promise no more off-topic posts. AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 06:59, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  best lGbt video ever 

message: Could I please get someone who has had no previous involvement in the article homosexual transsexual to have a look at the article and it's talk page. I'm very concerned that the article about this controversial term has been seriously skewed to make the term appear acceptable, which would mean that the article has a serious POV problem. I think that it may be a one-person effort similar to that attempted in the article shemale a while ago by the now indefinitely blocked user vinay412 and his sockpuppets. I'd like some independent objective input because I'd like to know if I'm over-reacting. My best NPOV solution for this article would be AfD or reduce to stub and merge elsewhere. --AliceJMarkham (talk) 10:01, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've stepped in to address the image issue. Is the article still unbalanced? Benjiboi 01:05, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. I've just copied one statement into the article from what is nominally supposed to be a summary of the article at Blanchard, Bailey, and Lawrence theory controversy#Criticism of the Homosexual transsexual hypothesis but I think that it still needs considerable work to be NPOV. I won't be surprised if that addition gets reverted out... --AliceJMarkham (talk) 02:57, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "Homosexual transsexual is a controversial term used by some sexologists to describe male-to-female transsexual women who are exclusively or predominantly attracted to males" Wouldn't that make them straight? --Tyrfing (talk) 03:08, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what's so controversial. The term is based upon birth sex, not brain gender. Nobody who meets the definition will self identify as a homosexual transsexual. If they meet the definition, they'll self identify as hetero female, not gay male. Apparently some autogynephilic transsexuals actively seek to misrepresent themselves as homosexual transsexuals because they see that as being a "true transsexual", so those who self identify as such fail the definition. :) --AliceJMarkham (talk) 13:49, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Homosexual transsexual]] 

message: Why is Cosmetics included in the LGBT project? AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 16:27, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think because of it's relevance to the Trans community. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 17:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Kinda strange, given that the article itself has no LGB or T content whatsoever - Alison ❤ 19:34, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It was added by User:AliceJMarkham - you could always try asking her. DuncanHill (talk) 19:40, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If Mr. Herbert (Family Guy) shouldn't have the tag, Cosmetics sure shouldn't. lol - ✰ALLSTAR✰ echo 19:45, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure it really belongs in the project. The reasoning (and I'm not trying to be smart ass or sarcastic) is since a trans person uses cosmetics then it should be included. If that's the case, then anything a gay or lesbian person uses would have to be included. (ex: I use condoms, then condoms would be added to the LGBT project) See my point?  AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 22:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree; if there were some significant discussion of cosmetics use by/ importance to the transgender community[ies], then that would be one thing. However, as Alison said, there's nothing. Aleta (Sing) 23:33, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Awww... why not? I like to eat chocolate. Can we tag that? (just kidding!) Aleta (Sing) 01:07, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I second that request! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 01:24, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yah, me three. Let's add :Category:Bisexuality :-D - Alison ❤ 02:53, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

text: I read the discussion and since no action was ever taken, should the tag be removed? There are some good points made in that archive discussion btw. I just think that some of the articles that have been tagged for this project are a bit of a stretch and reducing the ones that aren't directly related to LGBT issues would be a good idea, IMO. Thanks for finding the discussion Alice. AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 04:24, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess what needs to be weighed up is whether we're going to remove the tags from articles that have genuine potential for expansion in our realm even though they currently have little or no LGBT content, or leave the tags on those articles in the hope that it will spur members of our wikiproject to work on those articles. If we remove the tags now on the basis of lack of LGBT content, do we then add them again if such content is subsequently added? --AliceJMarkham (talk) 10:34, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: And then, will we include drag queens and drag kings, both users of cosmetics? I just think this is a stretch.. - ✰ALLSTAR✰ echo 10:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. If I ever get around to doing something about TG makeup, I'll likely start a new separate article anyway. It's not likely to be soon though... I said that about cleavage enhancement, too. :) --AliceJMarkham (talk) 11:36, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for fixing it. AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 11:55, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question 

message: I'm not sure of how many of you ladies & gentlemen read the Washington Blade, but the 'Blade Wire' and other news stories on the website can be very helpful in finding sources for LGBT-related articles. In the past few minutes, I've found sources for articles related to Ex-gay, Transsexuality in Iran, Freeheld, Radical Faeries, and more. Just a friendly tip. AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 07:02, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  News source