Template talk:LGBT rights sidebar

message: This template purports to be an LGBT rights template, but there are no trans issues on it. Anniepoo (talk) 17:14, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Disagree, each article should contain issues specific to trans people and many do. With very few exceptions our articles are LGBT not LGB. Also, for instance, same-sex marriage by defuault includes trans people but that is lost on most people presently. If you have suggestions for articles that should be included but aren't what are those?  -- Banjeboi 18:34, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

text: Added legal aspects of TS, was going to add Access to amenities (transgender), but it is pretty short. Wikignome0529 (talk) 00:42, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: An SPA removed this without comment or discussion, I've restored it
Anniepoo (talk) 20:04, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Rainbow Decoration

message: regarless of your position on DADT, I do not think it is appropriate for there to be a LGBT advertisement in the area of the page that is traditionally used for "an appropriate graphic". By its location, The LGBT ad biases the DADT article. The DADT needs to be volenatarily removed because it violates Wikipedia standards.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.177.66.156 (talk) 11:18, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't ask, don't tell is just one of many article that use this template. Whatever edits you make to that article, please do not blank out this template again.   Will Beback  talk   22:08, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: DADT

message: This requests specifically addresses the fact that an LGBT image that has been placed on the DADT page.  This article itself is related to the DADT policy and the chronology and effects of said policy. The LGBT is a registered Public Action Committee, which advocates for one side of this issue. The DADT policy has both opponents and proponents. Therefore, it is inappropriate for there to be an LGBT advertisement in the area of the page that is traditionally used for an appropriate and related graphic.
By its location, The LGBT ad biases the DADT article. The DADT needs to be voluntarily removed because it violates Wikipedia bias standards. Additionally, the persons placing the ad should voluntarily remove their request for protection; based in part; on the fact that their request to protect the article is predicated on their belief that the site has been subjected to "vandalism". In fact, none of the changes in the log could reasonably viewed as vandalism. In short, the placement of the LGBT image as well as the request for “protection” is disingenuous.  
Please remove the logo and unprotect the DADT article so as to allow correct, relevant, and non-biased information to be contributed to the DADT article
 
Penny4URThoughts (talk) 15:41, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done. See below. -Atmoz (talk) 19:25, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Penny4URThoughts, 14 October 2010 

message: This requests specifically addresses the fact that an LGBT image that has been placed on the DADT page. This article itself is related to the DADT policy and the chronology and effects of said policy. The LGBT is a registered Public Action Committee, which advocates for one side of this issue. The DADT policy has both opponents and proponents. Therefore, it is inappropriate for there to be an LGBT advertisement in the area of the page that is traditionally used for an appropriate and related graphic. By its location, The LGBT ad biases the DADT article. The DADT needs to be voluntarily removed because it violates Wikipedia bias standards. Additionally, the persons placing the ad should voluntarily remove their request for protection; based in part; on the fact that their request to protect the article is predicated on their belief that the site has been subjected to "vandalism". In fact, none of the changes in the log could reasonably viewed as vandalism. In short, the placement of the LGBT image as well as the request for “protection” is disingenuous. Please remove the logo and unprotect the DADT article so as to allow correct, relevant, and non-biased information to be contributed to the DADT article
Penny4URThoughts (talk) 15:41, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done. See below. -Atmoz (talk) 19:25, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Penny4URThoughts, 14 October 2010 

message: SPECIFIC EDIT REQUEST: REMOVE LGBT IMAGE (IMAGES CONATINING LINK LOCATED ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF THE DADT ARTICLE PAGE. 
This requests specifically addresses the fact that an LGBT image that has been placed on the DADT page. This article itself is related to the DADT policy and the chronology and effects of said policy. The LGBT is a registered Public Action Committee, which advocates for one side of this issue. The DADT policy has both opponents and proponents. Therefore, it is inappropriate for there to be an LGBT advertisement in the area of the page that is traditionally used for an appropriate and related graphic. By its location, The LGBT ad biases the DADT article. The DADT needs to be voluntarily removed because it violates Wikipedia bias standards. Additionally, the persons placing the ad should voluntarily remove their request for protection; based in part; on the fact that their request to protect the article is predicated on their belief that the site has been subjected to "vandalism". In fact, none of the changes in the log could reasonably viewed as vandalism. In short, the placement of the LGBT image as well as the request for “protection” is disingenuous. Please remove the logo and unprotect the DADT article so as to allow correct, relevant, and non-biased information to be contributed to the DADT article
Penny4URThoughts (talk) 15:43, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done. Please discuss this on the article talk page. Thanks. -Atmoz (talk) 19:25, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Penny4URThoughts, 14 October 2010 

message: Such as ? Gnevin (talk) 21:58, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: navigational or layout cues that aid the reader.

message: Is there any particular reason we use washed out colors like this:
rather than the colors pretty much everyone else uses?
--jpgordon::==( o ) 21:40, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi. I've removed the rainbows after noticing this template being used on Don't ask, don't tell. This template is already using two clip art icons. The rainbows are unnecessary decoration and they make the template noticeably distracting in articles. --MZMcBride (talk) 15:10, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  colors 

message: While conversion therapy certainly involves brainwashing, there is a lot more to it than that. I say we use the term conversion therapy in this chart and explain the brainwashing in the article. Bkatcher (talk) 16:22, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. "Conversion therapy" is a more precise term. Leangle30 (talk) 05:45, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Conversion Therapy vs. Brainwashing