Jump to content

Talk:LGBTQ history in Massachusetts

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by PrimalMustelid talk 02:00, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

Created by ForsythiaJo (talk). Self-nominated at 20:40, 12 October 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/LGBT history in Massachusetts; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

  • Article is new enough and long enough. No copyright problems observed. No problems with WP:NPOV.
    Given the subject matter, I spot-checked much of the sourcing for WP:BLP. I haven't found any that categorically fail WP:RS, but there are a few odd choices where I think better (i.e. more mainstream) sources could be substituted. For example, for "first openly lesbian governor (Maura Healey, 2022)", there's tons of coverage from AP, PBS, LA Times, The Guardian, CBS News, etc. Using Them seems a little WP:POINT-ey, bordering on POV. Likewise for Elaine Noble, whose 1975 election as an openly gay candidate was covered by NBC News, Conde Nast, WGBH, etc. To eschew those mainsteam WP:RS in favor of comparatively niche LGBT-focused publications feels like you're trying to make a point rather than establish WP:V in a neutral way. There's other examples as well. I don't see anything that's serious enough to be DYK-disqualifying, but there's room for improvement.
    Since I've been talking a bunch about "first" hooks recently, I'll note that this one falls into that category of things that are enumerable. One could make a list of every state legislator, every congressperson, and every state attorney general that were ever elected, but that would be a (very) long list. While it would be theoretically possible to check each one, it would be a major research project. Statistically speaking, it's almost certain that there were gay politicians in the 1700s. Do we really have a WP:RS that none of them were out? For an extraordinary claim like that, I want to see a more neutral and authoritative source than glbtq.com. RoySmith (talk) 17:49, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • @RoySmith: Thank you for bringing some of the above concerns to my attention! I have replaced some of the article refs with better/mainstream citations, especially regarding the Maura Healey ref (I also threw a better Elaine Noble ref in, but I'm sure I could find more/stronger sources). As for the "first" thing, I suppose you are right that there could be earlier examples, but given that we can't prove a negative, I guess that's just an inherent problem with the format. Would adding "known" to the hook help to satisfy your concern in this regard? My thought was that "openly" would carry that understanding - most likely there were previous politicians who were gay, but the notability comes from the public knowing about their orientation (given the social stigma throughout much of American history) and not about the fact that gay people can write policy or govern a state. ForsythiaJo (talk) 03:09, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • The improved sourcing you've added addresses my concerns, so I'll mark this as good to go. I do think the hook is a bit wordy, so let me suggest:
ALT1: ... that Massachusetts elected the first openly LGBT state legislator, congressperson, and state attorney general in the United States?
as a possible alternative. ALT0 is approved, but I'll let you and whoever promotes this consider if ALT1 would be an improvement. RoySmith (talk) 13:58, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
RoySmith, I prefer that hook on construction and punchiness, my only concern would be that the link is a bit easter-egg-y. I'd expect to click that and be taken to an article on the election(s) of these officials, rather than its current link. Fritzmann (message me) 19:05, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:LGBTQ_history_in_Massachusetts&oldid=1245598671"