Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 163: Line 163:     
::I was commenting on Wikipedia, not Conservapedia.  If Conservapedia has a few articles with a leftist bias they need correcting too to make them NPOV, but in any case Wikipedia is clearly even more leftist biased than this encyclopedia ever will be.  And Conservapedia does have a few articles with problems, mostly due to trolls from the far left who want to see this project fail.  My position is this:  For any NPOV encyclopedia, [[Gay]] should be a disambiguation article and nothing more, disambiguating to [[happiness]] and [[homosexuality]] as well as things like [[Enola Gay]].  The traditional meaning of happiness should be first and not any neologisms such as it's use as a synonym for homosexuality.  Queer should likewise disambiguate to [[strange]] and [[homosexuality]], again with strange first on the list and the neologism use a definite second.  "LGBT" and "Men who have sex with men" should just plain redirect to homosexuality.  Wikipedia's use of "LGBT", a [[politically correct]] "'wimmin' first" construction, instead of the more commonly used "GLBT" has also not gone unnoticed. [[User:Parrothead|Parrothead]] 19:55, 9 October 2007 (EDT)
 
::I was commenting on Wikipedia, not Conservapedia.  If Conservapedia has a few articles with a leftist bias they need correcting too to make them NPOV, but in any case Wikipedia is clearly even more leftist biased than this encyclopedia ever will be.  And Conservapedia does have a few articles with problems, mostly due to trolls from the far left who want to see this project fail.  My position is this:  For any NPOV encyclopedia, [[Gay]] should be a disambiguation article and nothing more, disambiguating to [[happiness]] and [[homosexuality]] as well as things like [[Enola Gay]].  The traditional meaning of happiness should be first and not any neologisms such as it's use as a synonym for homosexuality.  Queer should likewise disambiguate to [[strange]] and [[homosexuality]], again with strange first on the list and the neologism use a definite second.  "LGBT" and "Men who have sex with men" should just plain redirect to homosexuality.  Wikipedia's use of "LGBT", a [[politically correct]] "'wimmin' first" construction, instead of the more commonly used "GLBT" has also not gone unnoticed. [[User:Parrothead|Parrothead]] 19:55, 9 October 2007 (EDT)
 +
:::I'm going to skip the response to MichaelS's comment. The gay article focuses on the uses of the word "gay," both historical and modern. That's why the original meaning is defined in '''the second sentence''' and there is an etomology section. A link to both a disambigation page and the Homosexuality article is kindly provided in the italicized text about the main article. Basically the same thing happens over at the Queer article, except this time the definition that means strange is given in the first sentence.
 +
:::Terms like GLBT/LGBT and Men who have sex with men are not redirected to homosexuality for a good reason. First of all, most of the terms you listed are not synonymous. GLBT includes transsexuals and bisexuals, and Men who have sex with men includes men who are not homosexual. The other problem is that reasonably good coverage of the subjects takes a separate article for each one. If all of the articles in Wikipedia on the subject of homosexuality were put into one article then it would take Internet2 to get a decent download speed. [[User:PostoStudanto|PostoStudanto]] ([[User_talk:PostoStudanto|Tλlk]]) 17:10, 13 October 2007 (EDT)
    
==No Entry for liberal==
 
==No Entry for liberal==

Navigation menu