same sex marriage in the united states i've undone your revert on the intro to this article because although it's in good faith i think it's mistaken the reason you gave was that the information is elsewhere in the article which is already long so the intro shouldn't cover it even in summary as it's in the main body under history although i respect your intent of keeping it concise and avoiding redundancy the manual of style for the intro is quite clear the lead serves as an introduction to the article and a summary of its most important aspects it should be able to stand alone as a concise overview it should define the topic establish context explain why the topic is notable and summarize the most important points including any prominent controversies the lead is the first part of the article most people read and many only read the lead the issue here is that the intro currently says that state bans were declared unlawful in states provided some rights as from and windsor gave federal rights in there needs to be some mention of the backdrop and prior controversies as they were huge and an increase from to paras to add substance on the background context is in my view appropriate even very long articles still need a proper introduction that summarizes their contents take a look at african american civil rights movement for an example of the intro to a long ish article if you disagree with my reasons maybe we can take it to the talk page and raise it there see what others say first before re reverting ft talk email