Jump to content

User talk:Queerudite

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hi, Queerudite, welcome to WikiProject LGBT Studies!

We are a growing community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to identifying, categorizing, and improving articles of interest to the LGBT community. Some points that may be helpful:

  • Our main aim is to help improve LGBT-related articles, so if someone asks for help with an article, please try your hardest to help them if you are able.
  • Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
  • The project has several ongoing and developing activities, such as article quality assessment, peer review and a project-wide article collaboration, all of which you are welcome to take part in. We also have a unique program to improve our lower quality articles, Jumpaclass, so please consider signing up there.
  • If you have another language besides English, please consider adding yourself to our translation section, to help us improve our foreign LGBT topics.
  • If you're planning to stay, have a square in our quilt! You can put anything you want in it.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the talk page, and we will be happy to help you.

And once again - Welcome!

Point of view.

[edit]

Please don't add things to wikiprojects that are point of view such as you did with SpongeBob SquarePants. TheBlazikenMaster 18:35, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, that document is enough proof to me. TheBlazikenMaster 18:44, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Undid some banners

[edit]

Hi, Queerudite! I've just undone some of your work and wanted to explain my actions... In general, WP:LGBT has stayed away from putting banners on ex-gay type groups and people unless their sole focus has been on homosexuality. For instance, Jerry Falwell, while some consider him a hateful, homophobic bigot, did not focus on homosexuality but went on tirades against all sorts of "sins". He's one I wouldn't put a banner on.

Secondly, I removed a couple banners from some sexuality articles that weren't particularly focused on homosexuality - Sex education, for instance.

Hope I haven't stepped on your toes. I also went through some of the new banners and rated the articles - feel free to do this yourself when you add the banner, if you want. Or you can leave it blank so a second pair of eyes from the project can review - up to you.

Thanks for your work! I can't believe we'd missed Alfred Kinsey!! SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 02:08, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia runs by consensus, so no need to vote :) I feel pretty strongly that Asexual doesn't belong. We've tried to stay pretty true to "LGBT" - we don't include Intersex, for instance. Much as I personally feel "WP:Queer studies" would have been better, the project is sticking to LGBT. As for McCarthyism, I'm a bit waffly on it. On the one hand, as you said, there was a systematic firing of gay (and lesbian) employees. But on the other, 90% (a random figure - not fact) of McCarthyism was about Communism, not homosexuality. And I don't feel strongly about Family Research Council - put the tag back on if you do feel strongly about it. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 03:53, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're invited to a disscussion.

[edit]

Since you're the one that added the WikiProject, you should explain to people why it should be there. So go here, don't worry, this isn't a complaint, I just have feeling that you should discuss this as you are the one that added the project to the SpongeBob talkpage in the first place. TheBlazikenMaster 22:16, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered on 16:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC). SatyrBot 16:31, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is not usually necessary to categorise an article in both a category and a subcategory. If somebody is under Category:American engineers then they do not also need to be under Category:Engineers; if somebody is under Category:People from San Francisco then they do not also need to be under Category:People from California. It just clogs up the bigger categories. This is a basic principle of categorisation on Wikipedia. -- Necrothesp 20:01, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered on 16:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC).

Delivered on 16:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC).

Delivered on 17:31, 11 October 2007 (UTC).

Delivered on 12:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC).

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

[edit]

Delivered on 20:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC). SatyrBot 21:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

[edit]

Delivered sometime in January 2008 (UTC). SatyrBot (talk) 23:50, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No Free Image images

[edit]

I will continue to remove them as they are asinine and ugly and an embarrassment to the project. The Wikipedia is in the top 10 sites on the internet. The only people for whom the ugly No Free Image image has meaning are editors - and we already know that if there isn't an image there that there isn't a free one. Does anyone *really* believe that the teeming masses who USE Wikipedia (as oppose to edit it) will encounter that monstrosity, understand it and be moved to whip out their free image of a celebrity that they must have taken with their own camera, upload and tag it properly and insert it into an article? Seriously. --AStanhope (talk) 19:56, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think of my point? Does including these images *really* improve the encyclopedia? Is it possible that they are actually damaging the encyclopedia because they are ugly and/or confusing to all users who aren't editors? I'd appreciate an honest answer. --AStanhope (talk) 20:47, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you like them? How do you find them helpful? Aesthetics aside, I honestly think that they are not only useless for the stated purpose, but confusing to normal users. Please explain what aspect of them makes them helpful to you so that I may understand. Perhaps I'm missing something? --AStanhope (talk) 20:59, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please provide me with a link to the page where the "consensus" regarding this asinine project exists. Thanks. --AStanhope (talk) 13:08, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So, in other words, there is no consensus. Thank you - I thought so. --AStanhope (talk) 14:35, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

[edit]

Delivered by SatyrBot around 17:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC) SatyrBot (talk) 17:53, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

any particular reason that you added the wikify and expert tags. I just re-wrote the article and I believe it's an adequate stub, what might it need expert information for? TRAVELLINGCARIMy storyTell me yours 06:35, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

there's plenty of information on Google because it's a restored historic site. It doesn't need expert attention, there are plenty of editors such as myself who can work on it without any problem. There is no specialized knowledge. I don't believe it needs to be wikified because it's a stub, therefore it doesn't have a lead. I've stubbed it as such, and I believe the information in the 2nd sentence is fine for clarity and grammatical purposes. However if you want to merge it back into Hugh Mercer, that's another story and probably quite logical but as its a historic site, an argument good be made that it has standalone notability. I'm neutral as far as that's concerned as I can see both sides of it. TRAVELLINGCARIMy storyTell me yours 15:24, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I see you removed the people from Fredericksburg category --- someone *just* added that yesterday. Not me so I'm not connected but you might want to start a discussion on the talk page to keep the changes from being done and redone. TRAVELLINGCARIMy storyTell me yours 15:34, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You reinserted POV comments calling Markos Moulitsas "a full blooded socialist"--I'm assuming you reverted the wrong edit there? Gilbertine goldmark (talk) 21:03, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This newsletter was delivered by §hepBot around 16:02, 11 June 2008 (UTC). ShepBot (talk) 16:22, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

[edit]

Hello! :) I thought you might be interested in this. Check it out and add your name under "Participants" if your interested. Have a nice day and happy editing! --Grrrlriot (talk) 00:13, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for joining the task force and welcome! ;) --Grrrlriot (talk) 15:41, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note to say, thank you so much for continuing to move the discussion forward. I don't want to let the matter drop, as I really think the template is problematic in its present form -- but I was also beginning to feel as if my voice was predominating, and I didn't want to end up with just me and Cooljuno411 reverting each other.

Before seeing your note from today, I was about to list the page over at Wikipedia:Third_opinion. Do you think that's still a good idea?

Dybryd (talk) 19:07, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter (July 2008)

[edit]

Hi, you've contributed to past discussions on the Template talk:Sexual orientation page and we are now in the process of noting which of several proposals might help resolve some current content disputes. Your opinion to offer Support, Oppose, and Comment could help us see if there is consensus to approve any of these proposals. It's been suggested to only offer a Support on the one proposal you most favor but it's obviously to each editor's discretion to decide what works for them. Banjeboi 23:39, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

English slang

[edit]

Are you aware that in British English, "poof" is a derogatory slang word for a gay or effeminate man? Given your interest in LGBT articles I doubt you used the word in that sense but do be aware that it looks odd as an edit description, and especially unfortunate when describing the creation of the article Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club. Ros0709 (talk) 06:37, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alice

[edit]

Hi, I started a discussion on the talk page of Harvey Milk about the fact tag on who started Alice. Since two sources back me up, I removed the tag, but I would like to see your sources and figure out how to write it. So join in, please. --Moni3 (talk) 13:14, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alice B again

[edit]

Do you still need the 1972 Advocate? This past week I met a guy who lives/works in Schaumberg and said he might be able to help. He's cute, too :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:03, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Email me? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 20:53, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This newsletter was sent by §hepBot (Disable) at 21:22, 12 November 2008 (UTC) by the request of Moni3 (talk)[reply]

Titles for murder victims

[edit]

I just noticed you disregaurded the title decision consensus at Amanda Milan. Perhaps you didn't read it? You may not be familiar with wikipedia's policies regarding victims of a crime. See the naming policy for articles about murder victims at Wikipedia:Notability (criminal acts)#Article title. The articles are supposed to be titled "Murder of...". It's the prefered way anyway. I don't think there was any attempt at an "ant-LGBT" enforcement here. However, I think Matthew Shepherd (I read your message there) is better named after the victim given his status. But he is the exception not the rule.Nrswanson (talk) 04:19, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI. I am gay so there's no queer hate coming from me.Nrswanson (talk) 04:21, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Read the talk pages at Amanda Milan and Gwen Araujo. The topic was discussed and supported by the primarary contributors to those articles and in a majority consensus. I don't think anything more is really required. Further, I think the "Murder of..." title serves to protect victims by avoiding the tendency to turn articles into biographies or memorials that invades the privacy of the victim and their families. It's much more encyclopedic as well.Nrswanson (talk) 04:37, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The original conversations were held several days earlier under the title "notability". (FYI because of my questions these article are tons better than they were so don't judge the comments on the current state of the articles. The notability wasn't well established or clear before but is now.) It was only later after someone stupidly moved Matthew Shepherd that there was a general outcry over the other pages. (probably Lihass who I suspect is a hater) The conversations you are looking at occured after the decisions to move the articles. I personally think that the Matthew Shepherd thing got everybody's back up and now they aren't really willing to look at this thing rationally.Nrswanson (talk) 10:39, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had to make a small change to the edit you made so you could include List of the first LGBT holders of political offices. The reason I made the change was because the wording you added "Siksay became the first openly gay person to be elected to Canada's Parliament in his first term." changed the intended wording, because he wasn't elected while serving, or first openly gay MP. I know this is a minor issue but I thought I'd point it out because some might use it as an opportunity to remove your whole edit, due to there own POV issues, and I noticed you made similar changes to many articles. From my experience wikilinks to Lists can be very difficult to fit into articles in a meaningful way. You may want to consider just adding a (see also) section. I reworded the Bill Siksay article to include the wikilink, so no need to go back to it. Just trying to be helpful Highground79 (talk) 04:32, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it sounds a ton better, although I'm not to fond of non-incumbent. What do you think of:

"With his election, Siksay became the first person elected to Canada's House of Commons who had campaigned as a openly gay man"

I personally liked how the article previously liked to the prior members of parliament who came out but I think adding them to the See Also section would be plenty. The only other critique I have is, that I think it might be helpful to somehow re-add that there were 5 MP who came out while in office. I'm going to try to fit it in somewhere. If you have a chance take a look and see what you think or if you can make it flow better. I'll also go ahead and add the previous MP's to the see also section. Overall it does sound a lot better. Highground79 (talk) 22:20, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject LGBT studies Newsletter (June 2009)

[edit]

Category:Transgender people and behavior

[edit]

You nominated Category:Transgender people and behavior for merging but used an incorrect template. I have corrected this and started a discussion here. Your input would be useful. Tassedethe (talk) 10:58, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

[edit]

Hello Queerudite! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to this article, it would greatly help us with the current 2 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

  1. Carmen Vázquez - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:49, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Alexander John Goodrum has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

An orphan stub for a less than notable activist that has been unsourced for over a year.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Schrandit (talk) 22:03, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Mona Shaw, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mona Shaw. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. avs5221 (talk) 00:21, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

A tag has been placed on National Transgender Advocacy Coalition requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject of the article is important or significant: that is, why an article about it should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you can assert the notability of the subject, contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} at the top of the article, immediately below the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate), and give your reasons on the article's talk page, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

See the guidelines for specific types of articles: biographies, websites, bands, or companies. Lionel (talk) 08:25, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Alexander John Goodrum has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable GLBT activist.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. LiteralKa (talk) 03:07, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Come hang out with us!

[edit]

Hi! I just wanted to let you know that we have created an IRC channel for "countering systemic bias one new editor at a time", aka closing the gender gap! Come hang out at #wikimedia-gendergap. I hope you'll join us! (And if you need any IRC help, just let me know!) See you there! SarahStierch (talk) 01:32, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Loves Pride 2014

[edit]

Hi Queerudite. In case you are not aware, there is an upcoming campaign to improve coverage of LGBT-related topics on Wikipedia, culminating with an international edit-a-thon on June 21. See Wiki Loves Pride 2014 for more information. If you are interested, you might consider creating a page for a major city (or cities!) near you, with a list of LGBT-related articles that need to be created or improved. This would be a tremendous help to Wikipedia and coverage of LGBT culture and history. Thanks for your consideration, and please let me know if you have any questions! --Another Believer (Talk) 16:03, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride!

  • What? Wiki Loves Pride, a campaign to document and photograph LGBT culture and history, including pride events
  • When? June 2015
  • How can you help?
    1.) Create or improve LGBT-related articles and showcase the results of your work here
    2.) Upload photographs or other media related to LGBT culture and history, including pride events, and add images to relevant Wikipedia articles; feel free to create a subpage with a gallery of your images (see examples from last year)
    3.) Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

Or, view or update the current list of Tasks. This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. Visit the group's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome!

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's main talk page.


Thanks, and happy editing!

User:Another Believer and User:OR drohowa

Nomination of Carmen Vázquez for deletion

[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Carmen Vázquez is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carmen Vázquez until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Orange Mike | Talk 18:23, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Loves Pride 2016

[edit]

As a participant of WikiProject LGBT studies, you are invited to participate in the third annual Wiki Loves Pride campaign, which runs through the month of June. The purpose of the campaign is to create and improve content related to LGBT culture and history. How can you help?

  1. Create or improve LGBT-related Wikipedia pages and showcase the results of your work here
  2. Document local LGBT culture and history by taking pictures at pride events and uploading your images to Wikimedia Commons
  3. Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

Looking for topics? The Tasks page, which you are welcome to update, offers some ideas and wanted articles.

This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. The group's mission is to develop LGBT-related content across all Wikimedia projects, in all languages. Visit the affiliate's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome! If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's talk page.

Thanks, and happy editing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:40, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We're on Twitter!

[edit]
WikiLGBT is on Twitter!
Hello Queerudite!
Follow the Wikimedia LGBT user group on Twitter at @wikilgbt for news, photos, and other topics of interest to LGBT Wikipedans and allies. Use #wikiLGBT to share any Wiki Loves Pride stuff that you would like to share (whether this month or any day of the year) or to alert folks to things that the LGBT Wikipedan community should know. RachelWex (talk)

RachelWex 17:37, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

The Wikimedia LGBTQ+ User Group is holding online working days in May. As a member of WikiProject LGBT studies, editing on LGBTQ+ issues or if you identify as part of the LGBTQ+ community, come help us set goals, develop our organisation and structures, consider how to respond to issues faced by Queer editors, and plan for the next 12 months.

We will be meeting online for 3 half-days, 14–16 May at 1400–1730 UTC. While our working language is English, we are looking to accommodate users who would prefer to participate in other languages, including translation facilities.

More information, and registration details, at QW2021.--Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group 02:55, 27 April 2021 (UTC)