This is an archive of past discussions about User:Garik. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Project member Moni3 has been working on the article for Barbara Gittings and noted that the Lambda Literary Foundation used the lead paragraph from Wikipedia, skillfully and lovingly written by Moni3, verbatim in the Lambda Literary Pioneers calendar. Moni3 contacted the Lambda Literary Foundation to let them know, and to ask if we could get a little write-up in the next Lambda Book Report. There is a preliminary text you can find here. Feel free to add to it. It should be no longer than 1,000 words, and it needs to be submitted by March 15.
Place yourself in a user category so you can collaborate with other LGBT/Allied Wikipedians!
Mostly for allies of LGBT people; To place yourself in Category:Wikipedians interested in LGBT issues, just add [[Category:Wikipedians interested in LGBT issues|?]] to your userpage and change the question mark to your username OR add this userbox by placing {{User:UBX/LGBTinterest}} on your userpage.
Mostly for people who identify as either Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual or Transgender; To place yourself in Category:LGBT Wikipedians, just add [[Category:LGBT Wikipedians|?]] to your userpage and change the question mark to your username OR add a userbox found at User:Xaosflux/UBX/Sexuality#Sexual orientation.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please let us know here. If you have any news or any announcements to be broadcast, do let us know.
Hello Garik! Its been a LONG time since we spoke! Wow! Didnt know you were family too! lol. Anywhos, I am looking for mediation on the below issue, if you could express an opinion as to weather we should allow countries to have colored borders and title headers. I'd be greatly appreciative!
Wales
[Cymru] Error: {{Lang}}: text has italic markup (help)
Greetings Wales community! We need your Voice! We need mediation and impute from the wider community who regularily contribute to articals of Wales interest. At issue is the use of a distinctive border around the country info box, as well title bar. The issue seems to have become a crusade against Wales by certin editors, who have almost never contributed to and practically never visit (by their own admission) the Wales page. I do not tust the motives of the editor, who seems to be stalking my edits and reverting them purposefully. This editor even dismisses the colors of Wales red and green saying that Wales does not have any official colors! (quote: "I imagine that this use of "national colours" (of which Wales has none by custom or tradition)...", Unfortunatly, I must deal with these cyber bullying tactics if I am to contribute here. However, I implore the Wales commmunity to weigh in on the topic of allowing info box borders and title headers. Please submit views on Template talk:Infobox Country and talk:Wales. If the wider Wales community decides not to support a border and title header color in the colors of Wales then I will withdrawal from this position. However, I and other editors do feel it makes the Wales page far more distinctive. Sincerly, David Llewellyn♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk05:59, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Welsh accent
Hello there Garik, I have been listening to sound accent/voice clips on the BBC Voices 2005 study and have to say have noticed there seems to be some siliarities in the pronounciation of some words between Welsh and North-East English - inpaticular the non-Newcastle accents.
Mam is used for mother (though this is not unique), year is pronounced 'yer'. The 'O' sound in No is often often flat and long, and in general some of the vowels have similarities.
I've heard people say similar – I know a couple of Northumbrians (though, as you say, not Newcastrians) who get regularly mistaken for Welsh. I've never seen anyone do a detailed comparison, though it's certainly an interesting fact. I'd assume it was simply coincidental (the way many South-east Asian accents are said to sound a bit Welsh), though I suppose arguments could be made for there being some deeper reason. Are you bringing this up in relation to a particular article by the way? garik (talk) 12:03, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Hello again Garik, no this wasn't really inreference to an article, i don't think i've seen any studies on the subject and would suggest no proper ones have taken place, shame though cos i bet it has entered a few peoples minds, Wiki would have us on that Original Research rule anyhow.
The north-east is a strange one as it seems to be a 'germanic' safety seat - if you know what i mean by that (think labour safety seats), people like to put the accent and vowel tones (it is a bit sing-song though i'd suggest not as much as Welsh) down to the Danes or what have you. Anyway i just wanted to know your thoughts on it. Influence from Gododdin ? 167.1.176.4 (talk) 12:37, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
It would be nice to think that it's something to do with a Brythonic substrate, but, to be honest, I'm not sure how you'd ever get the right sort of evidence to reject the null hypothesis of coincidence. What's more, I've known English-speaking Scandinavians before now who get mistaken for Welsh. I think it's just a reaction to any accent with that rising intonation. garik (talk) 17:47, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Aye that Gododdin suggestion was a bit wild wasn't it.
Anyway on the BBC Voices thingy, there is one accent that the site describes at Cardiff and it sounds 100% like a full-on strong Glasgow accent, i was shocked! I still dont really know it fi was a mistake or not. 167.1.176.4 (talk) 07:58, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
If you look here, you'll see that a user of your IP address did indeed edit the Perversion article. In fact, the only edits from this address have been to edit Perversion and to write the above message on my page.
However, because of the way some internet providers work, multiple computers may share an IP address (as is explained at the bottom of the talk page for this address, so it may well not have been you personally who made the edits. They did, however, come from this IP address, which is where the warning was directed. The answer is to create your own account, which you say you've already done. So no worries. garik (talk) 17:53, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello, members and friends of WP:LGBT! I'm not one to be writing newsletters, but I miss our cruise director, Miss Julie, and our project is drifting along with a few leaking plugs in the bottom of the boat. Hey, it happens. Every group we join goes through changes. If Wikipedia weren't so interesting it wouldn't also be so frustrating sometimes. And vice versa. More than one Wikiproject has tumbleweeds blowing through it, but this is one that can't afford to let that happen. Even if you pop in to the talk page of the project, you can let us know you're still around.
WP:LGBT's Role in HIV / AIDS articles
It wouldn't be a proper gay community without a li'l bit o' drama! That's right. If we aren't arguing about something, then we should be asking if we're still queer. Maybe that's for the best, since we know we're still kicking. Our most recent topic is how far the role of our project should go in dipping our toes into HIV/AIDS articles. The main AIDS article was delisted as a Featured Article last month, sadly. (Sending a swift kick to WP:Medicine.) A spirited discussion is available for your entertainment on the WP:LGBT talk page about just how much of HIV and AIDS should we take on. As ever, we'll take your opinions under advisement. We're going to have to, because it doesn't seem to have been settled.
Is Pride POV?
We have a pretty cool sidebar that identifies core LGBT articles. Its symbol is the iconic gay pride flag, much like other Wikiprojects have iconic symbols denoting the topic is a core subject in a series of articles. However, a question recently arose asking if the symbol itself is not neutral. Should a pride flag show up at the top of the article on Conversion therapy? How else would anyone know the article is about queer issues? Is there another symbol that is as widely recognized and that includes all our many splintered facets? At what point do we stop asking ourselves all these questions and just go have a mint julep on the verandah and stop caring?
For the love of all that is holy, no Kool Aid jokes. However, an editor involved in pioneering San Francisco Supervisor Harvey Milk's article has included a section about the late supervisor's support of Jim Jones and the People's Temple. While it may be accurate, there is a Request for Comment regarding how much emphasis the section places on Milk's support in light of his overall political influence on the city, and indeed the rest of the United States. Milk's article is a sad one in more ways than one. It lacks the detail and heart that honors its subject. Anyone want to do a barter with me? I'll bring Harvey Milk to featured status (give me a month or two so I can read stuff), if you do something of equal value to WP:LGBT?? Make me an offer...
Queer Studies is offensive!
The established branch of study known as Queer studies was brought up as an category for deletion because an editor was offended by the use of "queer" in the title. It was overwhelmingly rejected mostly by the usernames I see here on our Wikiproject page. (A clue that I know you are out there, hiding...biding your time...) So, I wish I could congratulate you, but now I'm all confused by my sympathy for the editor who was offended. So, if you're reading this, Moni has a short memory and can't remember your username. Don't be put off by our demonstrative pushiness. Join us. We can always use involved editors.
What can you do to help the project out? Be a wiki-fairy, on many levels. There are all kinds of articles that need help. Why, just this morning I removed those ugly wikify and cleanup tags from four articles at random. If you can put [[ ]] around stuff, you can clean up articles. There's a list of articles that need attention at the top of the WP:LGBT talk page. Or you can start with the Lambda Literary Awards, where the goddess of my altar received a pioneering award, and was "reduced to rubble" by Katherine V. Forrest's wonderful speech. The 20th ceremony of the Lambda Literary Awards, which celebrates LGBT literature, took place in West Hollywood on May 29th [1]. The page needs to be updated with the new winners, to be found on the official website [2].
Why on earth would someone want to delete material about homosexuality? 'Tis truly a mystery. But these embattled articles have some random evil gnomes removing information that places these folks under our queer umbrella. Help us keep an eye out for the deletions. Take a peek at the articles, familiarize yourselves with the info, and be handy with the undo function in the article history. If tempers flare, take it to the Hall monitors and let them sort it out. Best solution is to make sure your sources are immaculate.
This month's Wiki stars
This is what I get for opening my big fat mouth and suggesting the newsletter should be revived. Here I am writing it. So, to pat self on back (*cough*) Mulholland Dr. became a featured article in May. This is A Good Thing since it is my personal declaration that there is no such thing as lesbian porn. I don't care what Benjiboi says about the video collection at goodvibes. Instead, we have hot women who connect on a deep, personal, soul-touching level, so this film should qualify as some of the skankiest porn available for lesbians. Plus, it's completely confusing and surreal! D'you think Laura Harring would care that the article is featured? I don't think so either... (Call me, Laura!)
Compulsive hoarding of templates
Once I saw a harrowing episode of Animal Planet's Animal Cops where this guy had, like, 250 cats in his house and it freaked me right out. I'm drawing a parallel between 250 cats and, well...three, really, templates in articles involving LGBT issues. Can we stick to one, maybe? In the aforementioned Harvey Milk's article there's a core LGBT template, a link to the LGBT portal, and a sidebar for LGBT rights. Jiminy! You'd think we weren't the folk to set industrial grey carpeting and track lighting in vogue. An LGBT footer was designed to link to articles of interest that aren't the aforementioned core articles. What do you think, can we have either an LGBT template for core articles, a footer for LGBT articles that are high profile but not core, or an LGBT rights template? As ever, anything's up for discussion on the WP:LGBT talk page.
It's June, Pride month. Wear sunscreen, stay hydrated, get a designated driver, then go half-dressed in the streets find a girlfriend or boyfriend, or some homo who's standing there looking lonely and kiss 'em up real good. Remember, it all started 39 years ago when a bunch of drag queens just got fed the f*ck up by the cops raiding the bar and dragging them all out to the pokey again. Rock on, queens! Enjoy your celebrations. My town's is in October, and 200 people attend. I miss Denver.
It looks like we've picked up a lot of talent lately. We have no doubt you'll be making your indelible mark on LGBT knowledge as we know it, here at Wikipedia.
In the immortal words of Miss Julie, "May all your Wiki days be bright, and may your Love Boat never turn into a Poseidon."
We miss you, Miss Julie, as well as all the others who have graced our project and are on wiki-breaks or just got fed up with all the nuttiness and went to live their lives. Get your stupid houses built and hurry up and come back. --Moni3 (talk) 16:52, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please let us know here. If you have any news or any announcements to be broadcast, do let Moni3 know.
Hallo,
I thought that I'd contact you here because, otherwise, the discussion will turn into a full-on debate and take over the page!
I'm trying to think of any countries which contain countries that are also part of the same country and I cannot. I'm not saying that there aren't any, just that I can't think of any. If you can help me, I may be forced to concede. With just about all of the countries that I can think of, I can "name" the inhabitants, for example; Chinese people come from China, Senegalese, from Senegal, Finnish from Finland, Russian from Russia, Egyptian from Egypt. What do you call someone from the U.K.? I didn't mean that because the U.K. was a kingdom, that prevented it from being a country but that it was a collection, for want of a better word, OF countries, both declared and recognised and therefore, how could it be a country? (Zippstar (talk) 19:30, 11 June 2008 (UTC))
Hi. You seem to be asking several different questions here:
1) Are there any other countries that contain countries?
Hard to say. the UK is certainly unusual in this regard, but then it's unusual in other respects too. The best modern example is Spain. This contains Catalonia and part of the Basque Country. Admittedly, not everyone would call Catalonia a country, but very many people certainly would. And no one would deny that Spain is a country. A good historical example is the Soviet Union, which was itself a country, but contained within itself numerous smaller countries.
2) Are there any other countries where the name for the inhabitants is related to the name for the country?
How about the Netherlands? And we don't call inhabitants of the USA Usanians — not in English anyhow. The thing is that this is specific to the English language in any case.
3) What do you call someone from the UK?
British or (as a noun) a Briton.
4) Can a collection of countries be called a country?
Yes, why not?
So people from Britain are called Britons, and some of those Britons are Welsh, others English, other Scottish, and others Northern Irish. Some, who have lived all over the country, call themselves just British. But this still has nothing to do with whether or not the UK is a country. It is a Kingdom made up of smaller parts that are themselves countries. None of this means that the UK itself is not also a country. I don't understand your difficulty here: why can't a collection of countries also be a country? Even if the UK were the only example in the modern world of this phenomenon, there's nothing to say that it can't be so. garik (talk) 20:20, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Hallo, again.
You have raised some good points. Indeed, people from the Netherlands/ Low Countries/ Holland, we call Dutch. Is Britain not the island comprising England, Scotland and Wales? Northern Ireland is not part of Great Britain or the British Isles, so why would its inhabitants be called British? The U.S.A are, of course, the United States of America and the inhabitants are known, simply, as Americans. Difficulty? I think that, probably, for the first time, I'm questioning my notion of what a country is. (I hope that I'm not the only one.) I've never known the U.K. as a country but a nation of countries, likewise the Soviet Union (C.C.C.P.), as my father lived there, specifically Russia. What did we call those people? I'm always questioning and my family come from a land that had its own rules before borders were drawn by foreigners, so maybe I'm used to seeing things differently.
Thank you for your input. Feel free to write to me any time.(Zippstar (talk) 22:04, 11 June 2008 (UTC))
Indeed - that's exactly what I did too. And now, let's not get into issues about 'origns' or it might get tricky for both of us. Eagerly awaiting the discussion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supriyya (talk • contribs) 19:20, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
uh, yes, I'm sorry, my revert may have been ill-advised. I do think the lead I reverted to contains a listing of central sub-topics that would belong there, and which got lost in your revert, but I probably didn't ponder the precise phrasing well enough. Feel free to revert for now, and I'll try to get back to this with some more time on my hands later. Regards, dab(𒁳)13:55, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
An unfortunate effect of a group less active than in the past is that our articles lose integrity. This one is at Good Article Review for that reason. The talk page is quite active as a result. You have the opportunity to help. This is the corest of our core articles, and it needs some attention because it gets a lot of controversial input from many sides. If you can spare any time to edit the article, please do what you can.
Soon after we were informed that Homosexuality is being scrutinized, we heard the same for one of our few Featured Articles. As a participant of the Featured Article process, I think this is actually a good thing. The standards for Featured Articles are getting higher with time. But as a member of this project, that means that a few of ours may be de-listed unless someone can swoop in and save them. This one has to do with the designation of homosexuality as a crime in Germany. Most of this article's sources are in German. If anyone has any particular skill in this area, please lend a hand!
I know you folks think I have much experience in a gay bathhouse, and I hate to disappoint you, but I actually do not. I seem like the sort of person who likes to stroll about in a towel. Shocking, no? It appears that Ashleyvh is single-handedly addressing all the problems with this article at its GA Review. While that's pretty impressive, it's also no doubt exhausting. Can anyone help out there?
In what I hope will counter the jolt of re-evaluating three Good or Featured Articles, José Sarria and Janet Jackson as gay icon passed as Good Articles, and Black Cat Bar (famous San Francisco oft-raided gay bar) is nominated, all by Otto4711. Rock on, man. You're a machine. Good luck with your nominations. What is it about women that make them gay icons? And are there lesbian icons that aren't lesbians? How about bisexual icons? Am I the only lesbian who reacts with soul-trembling fear at the sight of Angelina Jolie?
New WP:LGBT studies member Pinkkeith has done this cool thing. If you click on that link, you'll see all the articles, categories, templates, and miscellany up for deletion. They're usually there because they're not considered to be not notable. That can be a relative concept, and sometimes it has to be argued that topics pertaining to gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender issues are notable.
It seems a recurring issue which articles to tag, and what to say about a topic that's tagged. Certainly, because an article falls under our scope doesn't necessarily make the person gay. Florida Governor Charlie Crist has been rumored to be gay in some newspaper accounts. Although we all know Fred Phelps is supergay, he won't admit it so instead he does the absolutely awfulest anti-gay things on the planet to deflect suspicion. NAMBLA, the red headed stepchild of the LGBT world, is tagged with an explanation we have yet to decide if we'll keep.
In the lurking I do around and about on Wiki, I've long been astounded at the forbearance Benjiboi has for the utterly insane. Perhaps not so much, since the message on Benji's talk page notes frequent absences due to homophobia and transphobia. But it takes some kind of ... something that I don't have to face the constant anti-gay POV Benji does.
Benjiboi is a a bit of a WikiFaerie, a WikiGnome and also a member of the Article Rescue Squadron in addition to being a LGBT project member. A few of Benjiboi's favorite links for making the wikiverse more fab are:
Becksguy didn’t start actively editing until May 2007. His most frequent tasks on Wiki include reverting vandalism to LGBT articles and creating new project-related articles. He comes from New York state, and to prove not all of us are teenagers (ha! I am so totally 15!) he's in his 60s and retired.
Becksguy considers his biggest triumph on Wikipedia so far was a DYK in December 2007 for the first-ever newspaper report on what became AIDS, in the New York Native. He's also helped save several project-related articles from deletion. His lowest moment here was getting involved in the discussion on a particular terrorism related article, thinking he could help calm the roiled waters on an extremely contentious subject with multiple edit wars and passionate editors.
Here at WP:LGBT, he creates and improves articles that present notable LGBT related subjects in a fair and balanced way, and tries to include more of the significant alternative sexuality related subjects without being an activist, and works to better source project-related articles.
On Wikipedia as a whole, he says, "I think we need to learn better what processes work for a massive collaborative project. Some of what worked well for a more informal small project doesn’t scale up well. Process is not as important when the participants know each other. We need to get more of the current members to be more active. If more members were energized, the project would be able to accomplish more. We should be, in effect, the smaller and included Wikipedia for LGBT related subjects. Overall, I wish we could focus more on content creation and improvement, and less on vandal fighting."
"A Supreme Court decision in 1958 reversed a 1956 ruling by a federal district court that U.S. postal authorities were correct in prohibiting the mailing of the Mattachine Society's ONE magazine. The lower court had ruled that ONE was not protected by the First Amendment because the magazine's contents 'may be vulgar, offensive, and indecent even though not regarded as such by a particular group ... because their own social or moral standards are far below those of the general community ... Social standards are fixed by and for the great majority and not by and for a hardened or weakened minority.'" - Michael Bronski in Pulp Friction, 2003
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please let us know here. If you have any news or any announcements to be broadcast, do let Moni3 know.
Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice
Hi,
As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.
We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.
You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.
We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!
Hi Garik. While I understand that informal written language is language nonetheless, isn't the primary reason why spoken language is thought of as "more important to linguistic study" that it is natural language, whereas the written language is arbitrary assigned to language and is usually dictated by those in power (ie, the standard language speakers)? Thanks for your time. Languageleon (talk) 10:19, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi Languageleon. Actually, I'm not sure that is a very important reason. Now, orthography is certainly heavily standardised, but not all writing follows standard spelling rules, and sometimes the level of standardisation only goes as far as spelling in any case: written language can be nothing more than a representation of spoken language, sometimes word for word. Moreover, spoken language may be just as strongly standardised as written language. Now, it is true that writing allows speakers to take a lot more time over formulating what they want to say, and also allows readers considerably more processing time. This has certainly had its influence on written language; and some of that influence has extended to spoken language. Overall, though, the main reasons for focussing primarily on speech is that speech (and signing) is developmentally and evolutionarily older than writing. That said, it may be worth adding that a more tentative version of what you put; maybe something like "Owing to the context in which it appears, writing tends more than speech to conform to standardised rules"? garik (talk) 11:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the response. In my studies, it always seemed to be the reason why writing was never quite as "important" as speech, but they may have just simplify it for us undergrads! Languageleon (talk) 21:19, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm open to discussion though! The more I think about it, the more I think something probably should be included on this, although I can't think exactly how best to put it: it's too simplistic to say that written language is heavily standardised and spoken language isn't. garik (talk) 16:53, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Alright! Well, I suppose I shouldn't have used "standard" as my exact terminology. My intent was to point out that written language is not a natural-occurring phenomena--instead, it is a symbolic art form created by human thought. Humans didn't decide to start speaking; they did, however, decide to start writing. I only brought up the point of "standard" because there is a "correct" way and an "incorrect" way of writing, whereas linguistics places no value on spoken language. I hope I'm being clear--that isn't always one of my strong suits! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Languageleon (talk • contribs) 01:22, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
The problem is that linguistics passes no value judgements on written language either. For those who do, there is a "correct" and an "incorrect" way of speaking, just as much as there is for writing. The fact that humans didn't decide to start speaking, but did decide to start writing, is a separate issue, which is already addressed in the article. garik (talk) 10:43, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Wake up WP:LGBT! It's time to kick in gear and get some things done!
Project News
Wake up!
I say this to myself as much as I say it to all of us. I work a lot by myself or with individual editors who spend time at Featured Article Candidates. It seems on November 5 a fog was lifted off my brain that helped me realize that we have massive potential in this project to get things done. Take this allegory, for instance: On Wednesday, Nov. 5, 1980, my 10th-grade American history teacher started class by unfurling The New York Times. She pointed to its triple banner headline: “Reagan Easily Beats Carter; Republicans Gain in Congress; D’Amato and Dodd are Victors.” “Save this paper,” she told us. “This is the start of a whole new era.”Judith Warner from The New York Times
It definitely seems a start to a whole new era now. If planets align correctly to remind us that whatever advances we may have made in electing what appears to be an extraordinary president in the US, the moons that revolve around those planets also serve to illustrate it's not that simple. Florida, Arizona, and California all appear to have banned same sex marriage. As someone who was married in California and lives in Florida, this is particularly poignant. We seem to be at the juncture of two converging paths. If we maximize our efforts and take the right ones, we might just be able to affect some change for ourselves.
Though what we do is an interesting hobby for some, we have the power to make a difference. California's ballot initiative to ban gay marriage was a fierce fight. It's being challenged right now, but just look at how Wikipedia played a role in that: in October 2008, 360,238 people read its article. On November 5, an astounding 467,000 people read it. I commend the editors who work on that article—both those who support and oppose it. A look at the talk page shows a concerted effort to keep it civil and accurate.
What can we do?
How do you fight ignorance? With information. That's what Wikipedia is for. This project is overwhelming with 8,576 articles in its scope. We can continue to work piecemeal as we have in the past, or we can focus on goals. These are examples of areas we can concentrate on.
Current political events
LGBT Media and Literature
LGBT History
Sex and sexuality
Articles about political issues in the US and around the world that have been especially relevant within the past 5 years
Depictions of LGBT people and issues on television, film, newspapers, magazines
Topics about gay rights activism and the opposition to it
There are more than 8,000 articles to work on. Can we build a list of priorities? Can we build enough enthusiasm to work on these? What if we had editors who oversaw progress in these areas and reported to the talk page or in the newsletter? Surely someone here wants to report on the progress of sex articles.
Tony Perkins (irony) from the conservative Family Research Councilwas heartened by the recent passages of gay marriage bans. The Republican Party is without direction. What's going to take the place of a moderate voice will not be pleasant to our ears. Watching and improving articles of subjects that have opposed gay rights in the past will be of vital importance very soon, I predict.
But WP:LGBT is not a very active project
All we can do is start somewhere. The first step is answering this newsletter on the project talk page. Join in the discussion.
More things we can do
Give out more barnstars, and let each other know that what they're doing is valued.
Create a guide to stave off burnout, because editors in this project get burned out faster than others. There are many hills to climb.
Bring back the monthly collaboration project.
Participate in LGBT Peer reviews.
Get familiar with the characteristics of Good Articles and get our top priority articles to WP:GA.
Use the Newsletter, Moni3! You can suggest what to send out in the newsletter, too!
Offer research materials, copy editing, ideas, and support to your fellow editors.
Keep the project talk page informed of problems and discussions we should know about.
Proposal: Put Importance Levels on articles
If this was decided long before I was a member, maybe it's time to revisit it. Other WikiProjects, such as WP:Novels determine that some subjects have an importance category: Top, High, Mid, Low, or None (undetermined). If we decide that our most core articles, it might help to organize which articles to address first. Top importance, for example, would be Gay, Homosexual, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender, Sappho, Oscar Wilde, Stonewall riots, for example. High importance would be Homosexuality and psychology, Harvey Milk, Mattachine Society, Harry Hay, or Daughters of Bilitis, and so on. This can be a matter of discussion, or perhaps we could have someone in charge of determining these levels for all the articles we have tagged.
These are the editors I've seen working (and I know I'm forgetting a few). There's more of you out there I haven't seen. Some of you are new. We need all of you. Please help.
Miami, January 18, 1977 after the gay rights ordinance was passed: While Bryant and the others were creating the beginnings of the repeal effort, (gay activists) Basker, Campbell, Kunst, and the other (gay rights) ordinance supporters congratulated themselves on their success and then quickly disbanded... There was no organized recognition or celebration of the victory. As one activist remembered, "We just went home." They had little idea of the battle that was before them. - Fred Fejes in Gay Rights and Moral Panic, 2008
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please let us know here. If you have any news or any announcements to be broadcast, do let Moni3 know.
This is an archive of past discussions about User:Garik. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
