Talk:Homosexuality

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Archives

8 major identical twin studies demonstrate homosexuality is not genetic

Eight major studies of identical twins in Australia, the U.S., and Scandinavia during the last two decades all arrive at the same conclusion: gays were not born that way. http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines/identical-twin-studies-prove-homosexuality-is-not-genetic Conservative 05:28, 15 January 2015 (EST)

Cleaning up

There are WAY too many sections and subsections on this page, I'm going to see if I can combine the major information and remove the subsections with little content to make the Table of Contents readable. There are actually sections with two sentences or less right now. That kind of material would be better left in subpages or just referred to in the See also section; perhaps mentioned briefly in another section. I'd like to clean up the page so it is more readable though. --Joshua Zambrano 20:35, 25 January 2015 (EST)

User:Conservative I saw the page was recently protected. If you dislike the edits being made, can you tell me what exactly you disagreed with? By and large I just moved material around to trim unnecessary categories or duplicate sources, and added sections on xenoestrogens and polling.[1] My next edit by the way was going to involve moving the Ex-homosexuals section into the Personal Choice section. Just through categorizing, moving sections with little to no content into other areas, I had reduced the number of total sections from 35 to 16 and was about to reduce it to 15 so that the Table of Contents would be readable. --Joshua Zambrano 23:20, 25 January 2015 (EST)
JZambrano, I admire your zeal. At the same time, at this juncture, I have multiple demands on my time and I am unable work with you on major revisions to this article. And wouldn't be fair to the people I made promises to for me to get involved in such a project. It would cause unnecessary delays which they would not appreciate.
At a future time, perhaps we can revisit this matter. In the meantime, I suggest contacting User:Daniel1212 and perhaps you two could discuss your suggestions as far as improving article. Daniel1212 created a lot of homosexuality related content to Conservapedia. Conservative 23:53, 25 January 2015 (EST)
I notice Daniel hasn't done much editing since 2012 and none since October. Will he be online enough for that? I did leave them a message just in case. --Joshua Zambrano 00:23, 26 January 2015 (EST)
It is going to have to be enough for now. And another person who edits using the User: Conservative account has a demanding job and is now a part-time business owner too. So I know that person cannot help as well. It is a particularly busy time for that person.
Second, you wanted to give a strong emphasis to xenoestrogens in the article and place the material near the very top of the article. I don't foresee such a change happening.
Lastly, I know you want to discuss this matter further right now, but I politely decline to do so given my present commitments. Conservative 01:02, 26 January 2015 (EST)
Alright, I was just curious where the objection lay. I have no problem with moving the xenoestrogen material further down on the page. Were there any other concerns about the proposed edits? --Joshua Zambrano 23:26, 29 January 2015 (EST)
Personal tools