Talk:Unfinished Business (2015 film)

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Comedy Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

RfC: LGBT categories?[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Due to the fact that a main protagonist is LGBT, as well as many scenes pertaining to the LGBT protagonist dealing with LGBT issues, are LGBT categories suitable for this article? Boaxy (talk) 20:07, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Boaxy: I would say that LGBT categories are suitable, though you may want another opinion. However, please be aware that this is not the purpose of the request for comment system. The RfC system is used for disputes between editors that have been extensively discussed on the article's talk page, not for general questions. For more information, see the request for comment page. In future, please try a comment on the talk page without a Request for Comment and/or go to Wikipedia:Ask for help. Thanks! Max0987654321 (talk) 02:00, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No I been using wikipedia for ten years now. I know the protocol thank you. This is a dispute, albeit a silent discriminatory one, but this is a dispute, and this is the right decision to make. Ill give it another week or so and I'll add the categories and sources, and I'm glad you agree with me. Boaxy (talk) 13:13, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for lack of reliable sources, and due to the misunderstanding of the LGBT categories.--Loyalmoonie (talk) 22:05, 4 February 2016 (UTC)Chris[reply]
More information needed: "LGBT categories" is horribly vague, especially for an RfC, where the wording should generally be as specific as possible. I'm uncomfortable weighing in without knowing which specific categories are being considered for this article. DonIago (talk) 14:32, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT related American films. Damn, why do I have to be so anal with you guys. I'm just gonna add the stuff myself. One of the main characters featured on the damn cover is LGBT, and the film goes into that deeper. Sources will be added, and so will the categories. Boaxy (talk) 08:30, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have to be "anal" because some editors, myself included, want to know exactly what they're supporting or opposing, rather than have it turn out that what they supported/opposed wasn't what they thought they were supporting/opposing at the time. I can't imagine that it would take you all that long to specify the categories, and doing so, rather than complaining, would show more commitment to the change you hope to make. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 08:45, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

was the glory hole penis scenes necessary what an attack to sense that. 2601:6C4:202:B800:DC55:5B3:6764:2E62 (talk) 06:30, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]