Talk:List of LGBT rights activists
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page. |
| List | This page is a list and does not require a rating on the quality scale. |
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on March 9, 2006. The result of the discussion was move. |
JIP | Talk 07:38, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Criteria and organization
Per wikipedia 'list article' standards, any 'list article' should state the criteria for inclusion on the list.
Also, the list should have a consistant organization. Are they listed by country of birth? country of activism? country of current residence? The countries should be alphabetized and the names within each country should be alphabetized. Or whatever other organization scheme is devised for other editors to go by.
Please add your comments below so that a concensus can be developed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.15.115.165 (talk) 22:19, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Verifiable
All articles in Wikipedia must be verifiable. I have removed all unverified names from the list.
Note that it is not appropriate to add citations to this list if the relevant name links to a wikipage for that person. If the biographical page for the person does not sufficiently cover their LGBT rights activism then they probably should not be on this list or you should add citations to the biographical page rather than to this list. —Ashleyvh (talk) 12:30, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- All articles including list articles require sources. see: WP:list#Listed items —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.69.137.29 (talk) 03:06, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
- Agreed. However by linking the name of the individual to a biographical page this counts as a source and avoids endlessly duplicating citations.—Ashleyvh (talk) 21:30, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] definition?
What is the definition of "LGBT Rights Activist" for the purposes of this page?
And if Fred Phelps is going to remain on this list, I feel like the description should be clarified to communicate that he is not an activist supporting LGBT rights.
~~ tonei 21:31, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- There is currently no definition which is how Phelps and some others are unfortunatly but justifiably included in the list. Lasalle202 19:52, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
The most useful definition of "Activist" would be that most widely accepted from the dictionary. In Chambers the most relevant definition is "a person who plays a special part in advancing a project." It would seem that activists who advance LGBT rights should be part of this list but those who do nothing to advance these rights or work against these rights are not appropriate. On this basis I have removed Bryant and Phelps. —Ashleyvh (talk) 12:10, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- They consider themselves activists and have been labeled as such by reliable sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.69.137.29 (talk) 03:02, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
- Could you please actually quote a source that labels Phelps or any of the other opponents to gay rights as a "Gay Rights Activist" before replacing them in the text?—Ashleyvh (talk) 10:40, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
- per NPOV we can apply the same standard to all the others if you wish.
- Where the associated wikipedia biographical page has sources defining the individual as a Gay Rights Activist, it seems entirely reasonable for them to be listed on this page. To petulantly remove them on the basis that anti-gay activists are not considered gay rights activists seems excessive. By the way, if you contribute to a discussion page, you really should sign your posts.—Ashleyvh (talk) 21:18, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] sourcing
-
- Per edit summary "Where biography page exists, sources need not be duplicated here" is incorrect according to WP:LIST#Listed items "Lists, whether they are embedded lists or stand-alone lists, are encyclopedic content as are paragraphs and articles, and they are equally subject to Wikipedia's content policies such as Verifiability, No original research, Neutral point of view, and others." It is very point of view to remove some items 'because no sources provided to show they are gay activists' and yet return selected items on the list that have not met that requirement. And NPOV is a policy violation while 'petulance' is not.
- Please self revert your POV edit or provide the sources required per WP:V. Lasalle202 (talk) 21:34, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- I have reverted to a state where entries that were removed that do validly link to biographical pages of Gay Right Activists still exist (such as Bob Mellors where the first line of that page states "Bob Mellors (b.1950 d.24 March 1996 in Warsaw) was a British gay rights activist" and goes on to refer to 11 different citations to support the text). The editors that removed valid content were in error and I am undoing that change and so do not consider such a revert a POV edit. I agree with your quote from WP:LIST but not your conclusion, it does not state that citations need to be duplicated from other wikipedia pages rather than linking to the wikipedia page where they already exist. Please also note that a number of these edits and unsigned contributions on this discussion page are from the IP address of a persistent vandal.—Ashleyvh (talk) 21:45, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- Since when do some pages get exemptions from Wikipedia policy being applied to them because other pages have information? That is completely unacceptable. The sourcing material needs to be included on this page to verify the claims made on this page.
- Furthermore, Wikipedia is NOT a reliable source. Lasalle202 (talk) 23:30, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- I don't really want to repeat myself but you still seem to be misinterpreting the guidance of WP:LIST. As an example take a look at every other list in the category that this list is part of: Category:Lists of social activists (in turn part of Category:Lists of people). You will find that none of the other lists quote sources for each person on the list when a biographical page about that person exists. Do you consider all other these lists not complying with the guidance of WP:LIST too? I agree that WP:LIST is not completely specific about this point and perhaps you should pursue that guidance being clarified.—Ashleyvh (talk) 08:03, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
- Yes they are in violation of WP:V. Due to the open nature of WP, each piece of material must be documented in close proximity to the items it supports. We cannot guarantee that the documentation for the items in this article will remain in the other article. Wikipedia policy WP:V applies to EVERY article - if material is challenged, it must be sourced. If it cannot be sourced, it can be removed. Much of the material of this article was challenged, and removed in full compliance with wikipedia policy. Much was then improperly returned and the challenge {cite needed} improperly removed by you. I am asking you to revert your edits or supply the needed references within this article.
Once we have addressed WP:V, we can go on to NPOV.The new definition appears to be something that can be applied in a consistant NPOV manner. Lasalle202 (talk) 10:34, 21 May 2008 (UTC)- Err, so your case relies on every list about people in WP being wrong. Tell you what, if you manage to get even 10% of all the other lists about people to interpret WP:LIST the way you want to or get the guidance at WP:LIST to state clearly that referring to a biographical page is not sufficient then I'll accept your case. Until then I'm probably wasting my time taking you seriously.—Ashleyvh (talk) 13:16, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
- My case relies on applying Wikipedia policies TO THIS PAGE. The fact that other articles are lax in applying policies is not sufficient reasoning to not apply policies to this page. If you take a look at Featured lists List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people: Sa-Sc or List of Eagle Scouts (Boy Scouts of America) for example, you will indeed find that items are referenced. It is not up to me to prove the WP policies apply to this article (although I have), it is up to you to show that for some reason, they don't. Lasalle202 (talk) 14:21, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
- Also, the policy of Biography of Living Persons applies. "Editors must take particular care adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page. Such material requires a high degree of sensitivity, and must adhere strictly to all applicable laws in the United States and to all of our content policies, especially:
- Neutral point of view (NPOV)
- Verifiability
- No original research
- We must get the article right. Be very firm about the use of high quality references." (emph added) You have not shown any policy or guideline supporting your position. Lasalle202 (talk) 14:36, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
- Err, so your case relies on every list about people in WP being wrong. Tell you what, if you manage to get even 10% of all the other lists about people to interpret WP:LIST the way you want to or get the guidance at WP:LIST to state clearly that referring to a biographical page is not sufficient then I'll accept your case. Until then I'm probably wasting my time taking you seriously.—Ashleyvh (talk) 13:16, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
- Yes they are in violation of WP:V. Due to the open nature of WP, each piece of material must be documented in close proximity to the items it supports. We cannot guarantee that the documentation for the items in this article will remain in the other article. Wikipedia policy WP:V applies to EVERY article - if material is challenged, it must be sourced. If it cannot be sourced, it can be removed. Much of the material of this article was challenged, and removed in full compliance with wikipedia policy. Much was then improperly returned and the challenge {cite needed} improperly removed by you. I am asking you to revert your edits or supply the needed references within this article.
- I don't really want to repeat myself but you still seem to be misinterpreting the guidance of WP:LIST. As an example take a look at every other list in the category that this list is part of: Category:Lists of social activists (in turn part of Category:Lists of people). You will find that none of the other lists quote sources for each person on the list when a biographical page about that person exists. Do you consider all other these lists not complying with the guidance of WP:LIST too? I agree that WP:LIST is not completely specific about this point and perhaps you should pursue that guidance being clarified.—Ashleyvh (talk) 08:03, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
- I have reverted to a state where entries that were removed that do validly link to biographical pages of Gay Right Activists still exist (such as Bob Mellors where the first line of that page states "Bob Mellors (b.1950 d.24 March 1996 in Warsaw) was a British gay rights activist" and goes on to refer to 11 different citations to support the text). The editors that removed valid content were in error and I am undoing that change and so do not consider such a revert a POV edit. I agree with your quote from WP:LIST but not your conclusion, it does not state that citations need to be duplicated from other wikipedia pages rather than linking to the wikipedia page where they already exist. Please also note that a number of these edits and unsigned contributions on this discussion page are from the IP address of a persistent vandal.—Ashleyvh (talk) 21:45, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Well you are obviously absolutely convinced that your interpretation of WP:LIST overrules the consensus view of other list creators. I have no issue with you cut and pasting citations from each biography page if that is what you want to add to this list but I will object to perfectly valid gay rights activists being removed from this list on the basis that a citation that exists on the biography page has not been duplicated here as no guidance that you have pointed to so far explicitly makes this WP policy. I refer to the same policies to support my viewpoint as outlined before. As you would rather debate this list rather than get the policy clarified I guess the matter will stay unresolved.—Ashleyvh (talk) 23:31, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
- If you cant be convinced by policies to follow policies, so be it.Lasalle202 (talk) 01:28, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] organization
I would like to propose that the article be re-organized solely alphabetically, with the country (countries) where the individual has been 'active' noted in parens behind the activists names. Or perhaps, the list converted to a sortable table where a reader could click to sort by name or country.Lasalle202 (talk) 13:06, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
