Revision as of 13:09, 7 January 2013 editInsomesia (talk | contribs)3,057 edits →Your anonymous editing at Conversion therapy: comment← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:20, 8 January 2013 edit undoLittle green rosetta (talk | contribs)5,428 edits →Canvassing: new sectionNext edit → | ||
Line 295: | Line 295: | ||
:That was not made by me logged out or otherwise. ] (]) 13:09, 7 January 2013 (UTC) | :That was not made by me logged out or otherwise. ] (]) 13:09, 7 January 2013 (UTC) | ||
== Canvassing == | |||
This edit is clearly not acceptable per ]. Please refactor or remove this canvassing attempt. ]{{SubSup||]|]}} 16:20, 8 January 2013 (UTC) |
Revision as of 16:20, 8 January 2013
DYK nomination of Ben (Gay is Okay)
I have created Template:Did you know nominations/Ben (Gay is Okay) under eligibility rules of WP:DYK. One of proposed hooks will be reviewed. Thank you for your contributions to this article. --George Ho (talk) 04:46, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
In response to your feedback
Where?
A Wild Abigail Appears! Capture me. Moves. 19:50, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi, unfortunately I wrote up several discourses and it all was erased in error. Some articles I found to be
Harry Hay, Men who have sex with men, every religion and homosexuality article I've seen, Homophobia, etc. Many of the known myths of anti-gay hate seem to be over represented:
10 Anti-Gay Myths Debunked 1. Gay people molest children at far higher rates than heterosexuals 2. Same-sex parents harm children. 3. People become homosexual because they were sexually abused as children or there was a deficiency in sex-role modeling by their parents. 4. Gay people don't live nearly as long as heterosexuals. 5. Gay men controlled the Nazi Party and helped to orchestrate the Holocaust. 6. Hate crime laws will lead to the jailing of pastors who criticize homosexuality and the legalization of practices like bestiality and necrophilia. 7. Allowing gay people to serve openly would damage the armed forces. 8. Gay people are more prone to be mentally ill and to abuse drugs and alcohol. 9. No one is born gay. 10. Gay people can choose to leave homosexuality.
As far as I can see each of these myths is alive and well here. Hopefully this will change but as it's so pervasive and has been around for so long I must assume there is a majority of writers invested in these ideas.
- Oh wow, that's a very good point. Have you discussed this issue on any talk pages? --A Wild Abigail Appears! Capture me. Moves. 22:19, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
- I think I want to focus on small sections where I can introduce credible research to counter the myths presented. On articles that are really bad I'm looking at if I have the energy to work on them. Thank you for looking at this.Insomesia (talk) 22:46, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Mitt Romney Cranbrook Incident
Thank you for your response on the AfD page for the Mitt Romney Cranbrook incident. One of the reasons that some editors are reluctant to keep this article is that they do not want to open Misplaced Pages to daily scandal-mongering. If you listen to some radio talk show hosts and cable news commentators, every week there is a new controversy about some politician, and most of it is crap. I believe that the Cranbrook incident could become a very big issue in the next few months. If there is a decision to merge, it may have a silver lining. Based on this Misplaced Pages traffic site, the Mitt Romney presidential campaign, 2012 website gets about 1000 hits per day, whereas currently the Cranbrook article gets 400-500 hits per days. NJ Wine (talk) 04:07, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
- You have a great point. I do wonder though, if the article is already getting nearly half the traffic? It would seem people are interested in getting a good neutral report on the incident. I obviously hope it's not deleted. Thank you though for being very reasonable in your views.Insomesia (talk) 06:14, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
Internalised homophobia
This is not a layterm that people understand. Two scientific studies supporting this and none opposing would indicate that this is an issue that should be on the frontburner. Javsav (talk) 13:15, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
- Is there any studies that clearly explain the two and how they are different? The entire section was made up of quotes and sources that I had added so I am already familiar with those. One of the sources talked about how there are several terms, but they don't always equal each other. Is there a good source that separates out what are the types of homophobia?Insomesia (talk) 23:34, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Homophobia
As a transgender person I can tell you that I almost never call the discrimination that I face homophobia. Especially because that the most common prejudices I face are actually from the Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual community. I think the Homophobia article needs to address the difference between homophobia, biphobia and trasphobia especially due to the discrimination in the Lesbian and Gay community towards bisexuals and transgender people. For example if a gay man says that Trans and Bisexual people are Gays and Lesbians who refuse to come out I cant really turn towards that person and call them a homophobe. If you want to keep LGBT together fine but find a way to do this while making sure that the Trans community especially isn't brought in on this. -Rainbowofpeace (talk) 22:37, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- I was just thinking a similar thing. That first we have the institutionalized and internal ones, then a new section with the lesbophobia et al. Personally I see trans people called fag, poofter all the time and it just rolls off them as they've heard it so often. Based on the activity at Homophobia I'm guessing those sub articles are also in need of some care.Insomesia (talk) 22:44, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- Also I think if internal LGBTQ community transphobia is notable it may need to get into the intro at transphobia.Insomesia (talk) 22:47, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- I think that by lumping the entire LGBT community together you are confusing the difference between homophobia and heterosexism. Homophobia, Lesbophobia and Asexual related prejudice are forms of Heterosexism. Lesbophobia and Transphobia are actually forms of Sexism. So I think that your lede on the LGBT community would be better but still not perfect on the Heterosexism page rather than the homophobia page which is literally negativity towards homosexuality. -Rainbowofpeace (talk) 22:51, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- I get what you are saying. I think if this were a different sort of website we could be very literal and it would wok. There is a way to make this work and maybe a universal paragraph explaining the differences would help. I wonder if it needs to be addressed first at the template? Lesbophia doesn't seem to be listed yet we have it as a main form, I'm not sure we have that correct. Maybe we come up with a clear paragraph about the terminology, as I've always heard of trans, bi- and lesbophobias as specialized forms. I'm leaning towards keep and explain in the intro as the general public may be interested and just needs to know where to look. If we want to spell out that homophobia, etc are forms of heterosexism, we need to strongly source it, I see presently it's under "Distinctions and proposed alternatives." I've been looking at just little sections but the whole article does need attention.Insomesia (talk) 00:10, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
- I think that to an extent biphobia could be a branch of homophobia and lesbophobia clearly is a branch. However transphobia is not about sexual orientation. Its about gender identity. If a woman becomes a man and is attracted to women he is a straight man. He faces transphobia but to say he faces homophobia would be a strech because he is 100% straight.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 04:58, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
- I don't necessarily agree that transphobia isn't homophobia although I agree the T is often lumped into LGBT issues without real care to explain the difference in orientation vs. gender identity. I think there is still crossover as those who display anti-gay or homophobic speech and actions don't often differential why they are expressing their thoughts, they just see anything different as a threat to their being, whether a sexuality or gender issue. Another editor has simplified all of that intro a bit. I think we could break out transphobia from that third paragraph and emphasize its difference. Do you think that would help?Insomesia (talk) 18:36, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
- That would definately help. Thank you. -Rainbowofpeace (talk) 21:48, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
- OK, took a try at it, let's see if someone can improve on it!Insomesia (talk) 22:15, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
- That would definately help. Thank you. -Rainbowofpeace (talk) 21:48, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
- I don't necessarily agree that transphobia isn't homophobia although I agree the T is often lumped into LGBT issues without real care to explain the difference in orientation vs. gender identity. I think there is still crossover as those who display anti-gay or homophobic speech and actions don't often differential why they are expressing their thoughts, they just see anything different as a threat to their being, whether a sexuality or gender issue. Another editor has simplified all of that intro a bit. I think we could break out transphobia from that third paragraph and emphasize its difference. Do you think that would help?Insomesia (talk) 18:36, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
- I think that to an extent biphobia could be a branch of homophobia and lesbophobia clearly is a branch. However transphobia is not about sexual orientation. Its about gender identity. If a woman becomes a man and is attracted to women he is a straight man. He faces transphobia but to say he faces homophobia would be a strech because he is 100% straight.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 04:58, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
- I get what you are saying. I think if this were a different sort of website we could be very literal and it would wok. There is a way to make this work and maybe a universal paragraph explaining the differences would help. I wonder if it needs to be addressed first at the template? Lesbophia doesn't seem to be listed yet we have it as a main form, I'm not sure we have that correct. Maybe we come up with a clear paragraph about the terminology, as I've always heard of trans, bi- and lesbophobias as specialized forms. I'm leaning towards keep and explain in the intro as the general public may be interested and just needs to know where to look. If we want to spell out that homophobia, etc are forms of heterosexism, we need to strongly source it, I see presently it's under "Distinctions and proposed alternatives." I've been looking at just little sections but the whole article does need attention.Insomesia (talk) 00:10, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
- I think that by lumping the entire LGBT community together you are confusing the difference between homophobia and heterosexism. Homophobia, Lesbophobia and Asexual related prejudice are forms of Heterosexism. Lesbophobia and Transphobia are actually forms of Sexism. So I think that your lede on the LGBT community would be better but still not perfect on the Heterosexism page rather than the homophobia page which is literally negativity towards homosexuality. -Rainbowofpeace (talk) 22:51, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Suicide among LGBT youth
I doubt it - Developmental Psychology is a journal published by the APA, not a book published by Vintage Books. AV3000 (talk) 01:18, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
- Good eye, I didn't even think to look it up. Thank you for doing that.Insomesia (talk) 01:29, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
Incomplete DYK nomination
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Lesbian and Gay Youth: Care and Counseling at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 21:43, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
DYK for BEN (song)
On 30 May 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article BEN (song), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the pro-gay rap song "BEN (Better Everything Now)" was inspired by the coming out of the artist's gay friend and the It Gets Better campaign? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:05, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
DYK for Lesbian and Gay Youth: Care and Counseling
On 3 June 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lesbian and Gay Youth: Care and Counseling, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Lesbian and Gay Youth: Care and Counseling was the first book published on health and mental health care for lesbian and gay youth? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lesbian and Gay Youth: Care and Counseling.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:03, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Homophobia
Thanks for the work i've seen on Homophobia, it's much needed and much appreciated. We need more editors with an interest there. Thanks again Jenova20 10:20, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
- Wow, well thank you! I like learning new things and trying to tie together sentences explaining .. anything, is sort of fun to me. I'm glad I'm able to help. I'm still digging through the history of conversion "therapy", the origins of transgender and the unclear facets of heterophobia. I need others to see some of the obvious flaws that I miss repeatedly! But if I can help then great!Insomesia (talk) 10:34, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
DYK Hook
Hi! I don't really know how to reply on the DYK thread, so I thought I'd stop by here. I was browsing the DYK list, (I have an article in the line) and I read your hook. Since you asked for suggestions, I wondered about something like "... that the National Strategy for Suicide Prevention is to reduce attempted suicides and deaths in the United States due to carbon monoxide poisoning by redesigning automobiles?" I just think that would really catch my eye, FWIW. Good luck with it. Tlqk56 (talk) 23:15, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you! I do like some of the word choices and added it all plus a retweak at Template:Did you know nominations/National Strategy for Suicide Prevention.Insomesia (talk) 23:45, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
DYK nomination of National Suicide Prevention Week
Hello! Your submission of National Suicide Prevention Week at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Jmabel | Talk 03:50, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
DYK for World Suicide Prevention Day
On 18 June 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article World Suicide Prevention Day, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that World Suicide Prevention Day (10 September) builds awareness of suicides, including that one third are committed with pesticides like United Nations-banned organophosphates? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/World Suicide Prevention Day. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:04, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 29
Hi. When you recently edited Catholic sex abuse cases, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diocese of Orange (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 16:06, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
Template:Did you know nominations/National Strategy for Suicide Prevention
There are some new issues with the hook, both length and sourcing. I'm sorry it's taken so long to get this nomination moving again, but with luck it will get a full review shortly. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:28, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
Talk:Homophobia
Hi, Insomesia. You say, "Ignoring them hasn't seemed to work for the past months". I can't say whether or not it would work, but it's odd to say it hasn't worked when the talk page and its archives make clear that no such attempt has been made. Ignoring means ignoring—no response at all. You know the old saying, "I won't dignify that with a response"? There's something to that, it seems to me.
There's little doubt in my mind that this is all going to blow up into some big, dramatic showdown one of these days, and that worries me. When those things happen, there's usually fallout that winds up hurting everybody, the innocent as well as the guilty. Just lately, outrageous statements have been made, buttons have been pushed, and fights have been picked. I'm not immune to the effects; some of it is just so fucking stupid that it makes me want to lash out in response. But reacting that way doesn't benefit anybody or anything, it's not reflective of my better self on- or off-wiki, and it will wind up as a diff for someone to throw back in my face at ANI to demonstrate that there's fault to be found on all sides. And if reacting in a more measured, thoughtful way is equally unproductive, then maybe the best option is just not to react at all. I really don't know, but I think it's worth a try. Rivertorch (talk) 08:07, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
- I'm inclined to give it a try and have left a note with Jenova to that. I think many more would also have to agree to ignore and even then I'm not sure if it would make any difference. I would like a guideline, especially if it is meant to push people's buttons, as to what specifically warrants any response. To me that's why a FAQ may be helpful - "generally only specific actionable suggestions accompanied by reliable sources for changes are taken at face value." But that may be unworkable. I dunno. Maybe I should just figure out what can be written up on Heterophobia and focus all my energy on fixing just one little aspect at a time. I'll help however I can, even if I'm being called out for demanding reliable sourcing. Insomesia (talk) 09:01, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
- The FAQ approach is worth considering, and I'm glad you suggested it. I have found it helpful on a couple other pages. Don't know if it would work here, but it might be worth a try. Hardcore POV-pushers don't respect FAQs because they don't respect the consensus that leads to agreed-upon wording in an FAQ. Rivertorch (talk) 09:38, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
- I'd like to try it. I think it shows there's been an effort to address these issues (again and again). Insomesia (talk) 00:34, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
- This is ongoing, even an FAQ will be disputed by the POV pushers. Maybe (or maybe not) removing those comments when they appear per NOTFORUM would work? Thanks for the edits to User:Jenova20/Born This Way foundation they were useful. Have a nice day ツ Jenova20 11:55, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
- I think you'll come to see that some deeply closeted people will look to an odd communion of sorts, as a way of reconciling issues within themselves or that are deeply personal. They may never be stepped through logic and facts, and as far as I'm concerned it's not our job. Our job is to be ourselves and let others take or leave of that what they will. This, incidentally, seems to be at the core of the BTWF on which I am happy to work and let's make all the little monsters happy with it when it relaunches. Insomesia (talk) 12:07, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
- Wow, that's passion for editing...You have a nice day Insomesia ツ Jenova20 13:13, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
- I think you'll come to see that some deeply closeted people will look to an odd communion of sorts, as a way of reconciling issues within themselves or that are deeply personal. They may never be stepped through logic and facts, and as far as I'm concerned it's not our job. Our job is to be ourselves and let others take or leave of that what they will. This, incidentally, seems to be at the core of the BTWF on which I am happy to work and let's make all the little monsters happy with it when it relaunches. Insomesia (talk) 12:07, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
- This is ongoing, even an FAQ will be disputed by the POV pushers. Maybe (or maybe not) removing those comments when they appear per NOTFORUM would work? Thanks for the edits to User:Jenova20/Born This Way foundation they were useful. Have a nice day ツ Jenova20 11:55, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
- I'd like to try it. I think it shows there's been an effort to address these issues (again and again). Insomesia (talk) 00:34, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
- The FAQ approach is worth considering, and I'm glad you suggested it. I have found it helpful on a couple other pages. Don't know if it would work here, but it might be worth a try. Hardcore POV-pushers don't respect FAQs because they don't respect the consensus that leads to agreed-upon wording in an FAQ. Rivertorch (talk) 09:38, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Copying within Misplaced Pages
Hi! Just a quick note - most people aren't aware of this, it seems, but when copying between the attribution requirements of the license require that we state where the material was copied from. Normally we can get away with just mentioning this in the edit summary, but for larger amounts of text Template:Copied can be handy. :) I've fixed the attribution for Catholic abuse cases, but if you're interested in the details you might want to have a quick scan of Misplaced Pages:Copying within Misplaced Pages. - Bilby (talk) 03:48, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you, I'll check it out. Insomesia (talk) 03:52, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
You leave me no choice with edits like that
The LGBT Barnstar | ||
...but to hand out awards! Brilliant work! You even referenced stuff i wasn't planning on doing for a bit. Incredible ツ Jenova20 08:10, 22 July 2012 (UTC) |
Wow! Thank you! Insomesia (talk) 23:36, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Misplaced Pages better — thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:58, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Binarism
I would like some help from you and other LGBT and LGBT-interested editors on helping me with my infant article on binarism.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 11:20, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
Wow. Thats amazing. I can't thank you enough for all you did for the binarism article.-11:55, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
Barnstar for you.
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | ||
This is for the help you gave me on binarism. Thank you so much Rainbowofpeace (talk) 12:47, 1 September 2012 (UTC) |
Thank you so much! I'm glad I could assist. Insomesia (talk) 12:58, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
- Yes and please feel free to continue to do so. Your contributions will always be appreciated. This article means alot to me because it has personal significance and every time you help the article you will be giving me a small gift.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 13:02, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
- I'll try to remember that. Once it's a little more fleshed out I could help you get some sources as well. Insomesia (talk) 13:03, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
New speedy deletion
Hi!
Thanks again for the procedures to fix the Heterophobia and Homonegativity issues. Right now, I think it should be a priority to remove Closeted because of what it really is: nothing or simply a repeat of what's in Coming out. You will see that much earlier interventions (not on my part) to Closeted were an apology or defense of remaining in the closet in addition to a hodgepodge of unrelated references, some of which being ex-gay.
I've already added a succint "Closeted" section to Coming out and even though this new section is just a beginning, it is the most appropriate place for the inseparable concept of the closet to be fleshed out.
Now, the actual difficulty with Closeted is the high number of articles linked to it. Is there a bot that can magically and unintrusively replace "Closeted" with "Coming Out#Closeted|closeted"? --CJ Withers (talk) 16:49, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
- I'm reluctant to delete anything and i think we should look to resolve the bigger issue that we have several overlapping articles/concepts. Notably missing IMHO is openly gay. I think it would make sense to think logically where they all should land and make it clear to ourselves as well as readers. Maybe closeted should only go to coming out, or i could see it as being distinct enough. Not sure, or we could just allow that things build as time goes on. Insomesia (talk) 20:26, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
It's clear that what's left of relevant content in Closeted is already included in Coming out (overlap). What's more, "openly gay" is explained in the lede of Coming out. Please read through the article (again), as the issues you raise are answered there.
It would also be great if there were a bot that could direct all instances of "openly gay" to Coming out.--CJ Withers (talk) 20:58, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
- My point is that openly gay easily could be its own article. It has been developed as such but gay is not the same as openly gay so that distinction, when the phase was first used, how it's generally used, and that some people never considered themselves to be "in," so never felt the need to be out, etc. facets could be addressed. I think all those redirects are ok as is as they do not all equate to the same thing although we presently send them all to the same place(s). I'll think on it more, and we could ask for more opinions. Insomesia (talk) 21:03, 7 September 2012 (UTC),
Excellent, esp. for getting more input. I see Coming out as encompassing "openly gay", "out", "closeted", etc. --CJ Withers (talk) 21:08, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
- OK, right now I'm leaning towards ... a new compilation article like Terminology of coming out that summarizes the stages more fully than what we do in coming out. It might include summaries of:
- Closeted
- Coming out/National Coming Out Day
- Outed/Outing
- Openly gay
- Flaming and other modifiers
- Open secret
- Also it could weave in appropriately
- That some people are never in the closet
- closetedness can be in phases and recurring
- the presumed default in most cultures is that people are heterosexual, etc.
Does this sound like a possible solution? Insomesia (talk) 21:35, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Editor's Barnstar | |
Thank you for your contributions to the Parents Action League article. It's nice to encounter people who work collaborative and constructively to expand important content on the 'pedia.
If you ever decide to retire from Misplaced Pages, this valuable Barnstar can be redeemed for a well-deserved frosty beverage of your choice. Enjoy! – MrX 20:35, 9 September 2012 (UTC) |
- Thank you! This brightened up my day! I'm a hopeless optimist and I look to see what an article can share about a topic. Thank you as well for all that you did to ensure the content was accurate and coherent. Insomesia (talk) 21:35, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
- List of organizations designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center as anti-gay hate groups (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added links pointing to Religious right and Anti-gay
- Classification of transsexuals (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Normality
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:39, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
Classification of transsexuals
That's a nice start! You should also include GIDAANT and pseudotranssexual, categories that apply to most people who are fixated on scales and hierarchical classification schemes. I'll take a look down the road, maybe next month. I mostly edit because I find it enjoyable, and dealing with some editors here on these topics is far from that for me. Jokestress (talk) 18:33, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
- As a follow-up to your request for feedback on your article improvements, I can email you some relevant materials like the DSM-III and DSM-IV texts on GIDAANT; my gmail address is jokestress. Thanks! Jokestress (talk) 02:26, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | |
Thank you for your kind and constructive words to another editor who was clearly having a difficult time. I believe that actions such as yours make a profound difference in our community. j⚛e decker 22:52, 20 September 2012 (UTC) |
Thank you so work! I've had to disengage from much of the arguing which did not seem very collegial. And I admire them for sticking to strong editing and diplomacy when I perhaps wouldn't have! Insomesia (talk) 22:56, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Writer's Barnstar | |
Great job improving the quality of the page Gay Robot with a multitude of sourcing discussion and referencing efforts, excellent work! — Cirt (talk) 20:05, 27 November 2012 (UTC) |
- Thank you for the kind words! It was a big dig to find some of that but I hope it helps! Insomesia (talk) 23:56, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Your anonymous editing at Conversion therapy
This anonymous edit was obviously made by you. I'm sure you mistakenly logged out before making that edit, but please take more care in future—particularly when reverting another contributor. This note is left for you within the context of Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Insomesia, a sock-puppetry investigation page that I have closed without action. Happy editing, AGK 22:38, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
- That was not made by me logged out or otherwise. Insomesia (talk) 13:09, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Canvassing
This edit is clearly not acceptable per WP:CANVASS. Please refactor or remove this canvassing attempt. little green rosetta(talk)
central scrutinizer 16:20, 8 January 2013 (UTC)