Talk:Sexuality and gender identity-based cultures
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. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale. |
 Archives |
|---|
Contents |
[edit] reference to History_of_sexuality in text
Is the reference to History of Sexuality a reference to the book by Michel Foucault, which talks about whether coming out is prudent, or is it actually a reference to that wikipage? If it is a reference to the book, which is what I assumed, should the link be changed? If it's not a reference to the book, would someone clarify what in the linked page relates to the prudence of coming out?
[edit] On-Line Culture and Communities
{This is an outline section describing on-line social networking in gay (and mostly gay male) culture. A rigourous and comprehensive article would refer to articles published on- or off-line which have measured or at the very least, made note of the phenomenon. At present, it contains many rather bold assertions that cry out for imperical research, but which could also be justified for inclusion in a Wikipedia article if backed up by appropriate references to authors who are stating what I feel is generally believed to be true.}
Well-read meeja-types: here is your chance
Douglas Jardine 00:50, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] POV
I'm tagging the whole article for lack of sources. I'm also removing the following phrase (my italics) from the "Gay male culture" section for POV:
A small group of privileged, Euroethnic gay men formed the Violet Quill society, which focused on writing about gay experience as something central and normal in a story for the first time, rather than as a "naughty" sideline to a mostly straight story. --Textorus 23:29, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Article cleanup?
Since the first section has the same name as the article, isn't it sort of redundant? Shouldn't that section be something like "Definitions", then move those subsections up one level? Anyone disagree? -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 01:49, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] split
As an attempt to move this article towards Summary style, I've split the LGBT culture section out into its own article. The section left here is desparately in need of rewriting. --Alynna (talk) 02:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
