Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people: R

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by User:Matthewedwards 21:59, 30 September 2008 [1].

List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people: R[edit]

I and WP:LGBT have completed working on "R" in the list of LGB people. There should not be any LGB person with a Wikipedia article whose surname begins with R that isn't on here, though of course articles are being added all the time. References have been provided for every entry, and images are all CC or GFDL. Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:54, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Resolve comments of Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:00, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Comments

  • Per WP:BOLDTITLE, the bold part of the page title in the opening sentence shouldn't contain wikilinks
Done.
  • Why do we need two A-Z navigation tables?
I've removed the top one.
  • "See homosexuality and bisexuality for criteria that have traditionally denoted lesbian, gay and bisexual ([LGBT|LGB]]) people." Can this be recast as a real sentence, or put the links in the "See also" section
I've removed this sentence as self-referential, and linked "homosexuality" later on.
  • WP:DASH, for year ranges, an endash is used instead of hyphens
Done.
  • What is the dates column? Date of Birth to Date of death, or the years the people identified as being gay?
Birth and death. The "b." on so many of them makes that obvious to me, but I'm waay to close to the list. I'm open to suggestions on how to clarify that to new readers.
Hmmm. It could do with being reworded, but I'm not sure what to suggest... Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 04:48, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The profession column is a bit bulky. Why not just "musician", "director", "actor", etc? Also, for people where there is two professions, such as "Activist, writer" for Vito Russo, why does Activist have precidence over Writer in sortability?
Almost all of them are simply professions, though I've removed the stray band name to make them cleaner. For the most part, if there is more than one profession listed, it's in the order of "notability" from the person's article. For instance, David Rakoff is known mostly as a writer, though he's been on a couple of tv episodes and in a couple of plays. Thus "Writer" first, "actor" second.
  • The notes column should be left solely for the references
Disagree. Whether they are lesbian, gay, or bisexual is also a "note".
  • The "L", "B", "G" need explaining. I'm assuming they stand for "lesbian", "bisexual" and "gay", but a FL shouldn't let the reader assume anything. Perhaps they could be put in an "orientation" column?
There's a footnote in the column heading that explains that.
There is, I didn't see it before. I have to ask though, why does the reference need to state that each person is verified through a reliable source? This is one of the criteria, so it is implied that the list is verified through reliable sources. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 04:48, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That note is there (and the required ref) because the original lists went through several AfDs. One of the concerns at the AfDs was that the list not be a random assortment of people *thought* to be LGB, but that each entry be sourced. Since it was such a contentious issue through those processes, the note was added. It's probably self-referential, and therefore frowned upon by Wikipedia guidelines, but there ya go. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 04:57, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Use ca. and fl. for people who's dates are not exact
Fixed the one "fl."
Fixed.
  • Sorting doesn't work on the names. It doesn't seem to be done alphabetically by either surname or Christian name.
Fixed.

Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 08:07, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • No spaces between citations and what they're citing per WP:CITE
Fixed.
Including col headings... The Rambling Man (talk) 16:23, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed.
I have no idea what this does. Is it required? What is it for? MOS:Images doesn't say.
Well that section of MOS keeps changing! Anyway, in general the upright modifier is used for portrait images and, if they look okay with forcing the size, no "px" parameter should be used. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:23, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I still don't understand, but I've added the "upright". There were no px parameters.
  • Dates don't sort correctly.
I'm not responsible for how the sort code works. :) It *does* sort living people by birthyear, and following those, dead people by birthyear. Should I try using {{sort}} for the living people? Or remove the "b."?
I know you're not 100% to blame for this, ;), but right now it needs fixing. The birth years should sort regardless of dead or alive. I would get rid of the b. Oh, and the Dates heading is a little odd. Lifetime would be more appropriate... The Rambling Man (talk) 16:23, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've added the {{sort}}, but now it's going to be *very* confusing for newbies to add entries. But it sorts correctly.
  • Not sure of the benefit of making Profession sortable - it's free text.
  • Refs 5&6 are footnotes rather than references.
  • I'm sure Ealdgyth will be along soon but in the meantime, make sure all web refs have accessdate - e.g. ref 13.
Fixed.
  • Be consistent with linking - ref 55 has a wikilinked accessdate while refs 54 and 56 don't.
I can't - well, some of the refs are made using {{citation}} and some with {{cite web}}. Those aren't consistent. I can convert all the refs to one citation template, but is that necessary?
WP:CITET and WP:CITE say not to mix the two different citation template styles because they are rendered in different formats. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 05:08, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh <sigh> - why can't Wikipedia come up with a standard? :) I've fixed these to all be {{citation}}. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:28, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 82 has a bare URL...
Fixed.

The Rambling Man (talk) 15:44, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Any chance you can start the list without "This is a partial list of..."? FAs don't start with "This is an article about..." so we're trying to avoid FLs doing that too. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:23, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I understand what you're saying, but I have no idea how to reword that. Any suggestions? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 16:58, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think maybe just moving the first para to become the last para of the lead and discuss sexuality in general as the opening sentence. Also, remove the spaces between the ? and [5]... If you feel it's going to be difficult for newbies to add entries, have you considered adding a hidden comment in the list? Just an idea... The Rambling Man (talk) 17:08, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support—I wonder whether it's reasonable to reduce the size of the O'Reilly pic, which impinges on the table and breaks up the nice line of the pics. No big deal, though. I agree with TRM that a more engaging opening could be thought of. Tony (talk) 17:10, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hm. The "upright" parameter (see above) wasn't added to Rangayan, Reilly, or Ronson since those pics are square. Now, as you say, those overlap the table and I see the others have been shrunk quite a bit. The Rambling Man, is that parameter required? Because I'd rather have the pictures at the slightly larger size than they are now. Thoughts? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 17:27, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it's little wonder this part of the MOS seems to change subtly every time I look at it. In my (humblest of humble) opinion, I'd force the landscape images to upright as well. The key thing is that, once being represented at this size, are the images still useful? If so then great, if not then (according to MOS) you'll be entitled to force them. In which case, we may end up back where we started, in which case I'm sorry for wasting our time! The Rambling Man (talk) 17:36, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've added the "upright" to the last three. IMO, the images are too small like that, but what do others think? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 17:59, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Otherwise sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:00, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Ealdgyth. I've made the publisher, accessdate, and deadlink changes. I've removed references (and even a couple improperly sourced entries) from NotesFromHollywood.com, AndrejKoymasky.com, NNDB, HistoricalNovelSociety.org, Gender.eserver.org, and BroadwayWorld.com. For the others:
  • glbtq.com is professionally written and edited
  • PrideSource is an award-winning weekly newspaper with a 15-member full-time staff
  • OtakuWorld - doesn't need to be WP:RS. The reference is for Jennifer Diane Reitz - that's her own webside with a bio about herself.
  • The Overblow article was originally printed in BackToTheRoots.be, a Belgian magazine. I don't know the WP:RSness of that magazine, but since the article is an interview with and about the musician himself, the reference is good.
  • Gay.com (owned by PlanetOut.com is a professionally run news organization.
If you have any questions about those last five, let me know, but I'm reasonably sure they either pass WP:RS or don't really need to. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:02, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What's the status on the links? Ealdgyth, have they been resolved appropriately? Gary King (talk) 03:11, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_gay,_lesbian_or_bisexual_people:_R&oldid=1083283216"