Jump to content

Talk:List of LGBT politicians in the United Kingdom

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

Orphaned references in List of LGBT politicians in the United Kingdom

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of List of LGBT politicians in the United Kingdom's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "thepeerage.com":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 17:05, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Adding the time frame of the changes in the legal codes governing sexuality in the UK would help to put the lists into context and explain why the numbers in the past were so few. Either as a footnote to the lede or as a set of lines inserted into the lists themselves. Decriminalisation of same sex relationships, protections and then full legal rights are the dates needed at a minimum to give the list greater context. C. W. Gilmore (talk) 06:35, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unsurced content

[edit]

Large numbers of these entries are unsourced - even well known LGBT "celebrities" such as Chris Smith or Michael Cashman. I propose to remove every unsourced entry shortly, just giving this notice first. The vast majority of these people are BLPs and therefore any unsourced contentious material should be removed. Black Kite (talk) 13:16, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Black Kite didn't create the problem in the first place. Per WP:BURDEN, the burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:50, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Just go to their article and it's there; there is no need to delete them because the sources were not brought over with the named person. Consider one example: Alyn Smith, has no source for his name being on this list, but the source is #4 on his article, and in his public bio - [1]. What need is there to delete his name? His not only is "OUT" by his own admission, but on his own webpages states, "Alyn and his boyfriend Jonathon live in Edinburgh." C. W. Gilmore (talk) 15:13, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I can only think, User:Black Kite is being lazy and not even willing to click onto the person's article where the sources are located. No need for mass deletions, you want to add the sources that are already cited on their articles; sure, if that makes you feel better than following the links to the person's article. C. W. Gilmore (talk) 15:17, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If anyone is being lazy, it's the editor who introduced the material without sources, forcing other editors to check each individual article for them. This is a controversial article, which has been deleted largely due to BLP concerns before, so the sourcing needs to be impeccable or the material deleted. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:36, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The citations are there, as I showed with Alyn Smith, merely two clicks away. Also, it seems that it is not controversial at all when as in the case of Smith, they are quite open about their sexuality. C. W. Gilmore (talk) 15:41, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Two clicks away is two clicks away from complying with WP:BLP. Black Kite (talk) 18:46, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If you spent half this energy adding the sources as arguing over deleting, .... C. W. Gilmore (talk) 15:43, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wrong. The only people being "lazy" here are the ones adding people to this list without sourcing them. In no way whatsoever should the reader be required to click somewhere else to find a source. Also, in some cases (i.e. Woodward) the sources don't even confirm that the subject is LGBT. So, therefore, I will be removing them, per BLP, very shortly. I'm quite happy to source "obvious" LGBT personalities, but if you want to add 30+ other people to the article without sourcing them, they're getting removed. WP:BLP is a policy. Black Kite (talk) 18:45, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Cordless Larry this is not a controversial article at all. Maybe in other countries but in the UK MPs are quite happy to talk about their sexual orientation. Also in response to your comment about how a similar article to this was previously deleted. That happened 8 years ago in 2010. It is now 2018. Black Kite you are more than welcome to find the sources yourself, especially on articles about the subject, so rather than asking people to 'source the rest' why don't you do it since you are the editor who seems to be the most concerned. JimmyJoe87 (talk) 19:13, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You are right that the deletion was eight years ago. If anything, the community is even more insistent that BLP material is sourced properly now than it was then. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:02, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • It appears that you don't understand how Wikipedia works - if you add material to an article you need to source it, especially if it involves contentious material such as the sexual orientation of living people. So - no, it is not upon me to provide the sources, and as I said the unsourced items will be removed if they're not sourced. Black Kite (talk) 19:19, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for making more work for everyone else as we have to undo your deletions and add the sources, you refused to look up and add yourself. Great Work! C. W. Gilmore (talk) 20:42, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Completely agree. Absolutely disgraceful on your part Black Kite. Just shows how lazy you are as an editor. JimmyJoe87 (talk) 21:14, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What, it's "disgraceful" that you expect me to do your work for you? I've done half of it already. I think this is probably getting towards a behavioural issue at WP:ANI. Black Kite (talk) 21:44, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Added all the sources since the above editor couldn't be bothered. JimmyJoe87 (talk) 21:47, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above editor wasn't responsible for doing so. You were. See, it wasn't difficult, was it? Black Kite (talk) 21:54, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not call other editors "disgraceful" for insisting that policies be followed, JimmyJoe87. If you keep doing things like that, you're going to get yourself into trouble here. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:02, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If I had better internet I would have fixed them, but even Alyn Smith was deleted even after I gave both the source and a quote from it. So much easier to delete than fix, I guess. Perhaps tomorrow I will be where I have access to descent internet and I can undo some of this mess (with sources). C. W. Gilmore (talk) 22:08, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's all done now, though it needs tidying up (which I've started on). In the end, with BLP policy clearly says you must add material with reliable sources, not just throw it in and hope someone else clears up your mess. Black Kite (talk) 22:12, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nae, now the work has to start. You didn't even leave Alyn Smith even though I gave you the link: [3] Everything you deleted will have to be added back (with sources) which will be much more work. You couldn't have just marked them 'citation needed' until someone could get around to fixing a small issue, now it means more work adding them all back, sigh. I hope to have time and proper internet tomorrow. C. W. Gilmore (talk) 22:22, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Um, are you looking at the right version? Alyn Smith is there (though a better source would be useful, as that one's a primary source). (Edit: I've replaced that source with a BBC News story). Black Kite (talk) 22:25, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, as I said, rubbish internet at the moment. Which names were removed for lack of citation? C. W. Gilmore (talk) 23:58, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Pardon, Black Kite, but what entries were deleted? I can't find any and thank you for adding the references to the ones where it was missing. I ask because I was going to start working on sourcing them, but I can't find any omissions currently. C. W. Gilmore (talk) 20:27, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the unsourced ones, and then sourced some of them - then JimmyJoe87 did the rest. I then fixed the ones he'd done that had "dubious" sourcing - all is good now. Black Kite (talk) 23:19, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed new columns for the table

[edit]

Much like List of ethnic minority politicians in the United Kingdom, I think this article should include separate columns for the year a politician left office, rather than a combined column for tenure as a whole; the reason that the politician left eg. defeated, retired, serving etc.; and also what aspect of the LGBT community the politician in question is (much like specific ethnicity in the linked article). In addition, I think it may be useful to have a column for the year a politician came out, if they have done so during their political tenure, rather than before it. Greg (talk) 20:52, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:25, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:22, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:36, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page have been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:54, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:16, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:06, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Portillo

[edit]

I have deleted Michael Portillo from this list, in line with WP:BLP. There is no evidence that Portillo was at any time of his political career (or subsequent to it) gay or or that he has identified himself in any way as gay. The only evidence in this matter is his interview with the The Times of 9 September 1999, in which he said that "I had some homosexual experiences as a young person." To simply list him as an "LGBT politician" therefore infringes WP:NPOV and WP:V and in the context of WP:BLP renders the reference inappropriate.--Smerus (talk) 12:35, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's relevant that the article is described as "a list of openly Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and/or Transgender individuals who have been elected as...". I also wonder about some of the historical figures on the list. I haven't checked all of the sources, but I would be surprised if everyone on the list was "openly LGBT". Cordless Larry (talk) 13:04, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
My guess is that very few of them in any age qualify in fact if the header qualificaton "openly" is taken to apply to the article. Take for example Keith Vaz - he stepped down on being accused of using male prostitutes, but he denies the accusations. Under WP:BLP he should clearly not be listed.--Smerus (talk) 09:25, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed Vaz. I don't have time right now to go through the whole list, but I'm going to post at WP:BLPN and we might also consider an RfC on the appropriate list inclusion criteria. Cordless Larry (talk)
(from WP:BLPN) I don't care much about this specific case, but I personally think Wikipedia shouldn't have this kind of lists at all. A person's gender, sex, orientation, whatever should not be a criterion for appearing in a Wikipedia article; categorizing people this way is almost certain to cause completely unnecessary problems and discussions. I may be naive, but I don't see a benefit in making a difference between people this way. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 14:28, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your input, ToBeFree. I think I originally had this article on my watchlist in relation to this deletion discussion about a similar article: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of ethnic minority politicians in the United Kingdom. I suspect that if this one was nominated for deletion, the outcome would be to keep it based on an argument that the intersection between sexuality and being a politician is notable. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:40, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I also think that Wikipedia shouldn't have this kind of list at all, for living people or not. This may come from the absurdity a few years back of a politician (I don't remember which one) whom the media called the first gay MP (or was it candidate, or minister?), which is very relative seen the list. The main trouble with such a list is that it is WP:OR (unless we merely reproduce a list already compiled and published by a RS) and borders on libel when people, living or not, are added to it with shady sources or no sources at all. Place Clichy (talk) 10:48, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
From BLPN too, and I agree about the concerns, but I think what it has to be limited to cases of politician that have self-stated clearly their LGBT stance before and/or ongoing while in a politician position in the UK, and this sourcing must be present and clear in this list. This is likely going to make it very difficult for inclusion, but it is possible. The case of Portillo who stated homosexual relationships as a youth is clearly NOT that. --Masem (t) 15:11, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is also worth pointing out that this article has been heavily edited by socks of User:Marquis de la Eirron who is known more for their interest in this topic than the rigour of their sourcing. I agree that if this list is to exist, then we need to agree on a clear definition and then engage in a massive pruning of the article to remove all the names that to not meet the criteria. Masem’s definition seems like a good start: but what do we do about historical figures?Slp1 (talk) 00:52, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently I forgot about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of LGBT politicians from the United Kingdom, which is worth noting. Cordless Larry (talk) 06:41, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
According to WP:G4, this list article is eligible for speedy deletion as recreation of an article deleted following a community decision. Changing from the UK to in the UK clearly does not make the scope of this article any different than the one deleted in AfD. Place Clichy (talk) 18:19, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I raised that at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/Archive263#List of LGBT politicians in the United Kingdom. The article content is significantly different (the current list is longer). Cordless Larry (talk) 18:46, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The more I look at this article, the worse it gets. Peter Morrison is included (I'm about to remove him) on the basis of accusations that he raped teenage boys. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:50, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:08, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:15, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion of Edward Heath?

[edit]

I am not sure Edward Heath should be included in this list. While his as his article discusses there has been a lot of speculation about his sexuality, there is no consensus view on the subject among biographers, friends, colleagues and historians. His article is not in Category:LGBT politicians from the United Kingdom or any of its sub-categories, and I would note that this list does not include William Pitt the Younger, whose sexuality has also been the subject of debate, albeit on a more limited scale. Dunarc (talk) 20:54, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see he has now been removed from the list, which I think is probably the correct call given the lack of consensus. Dunarc (talk) 19:02, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in List of LGBT politicians in the United Kingdom

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of List of LGBT politicians in the United Kingdom's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "telegraph":

  • From William Wragg: "Tory MP admits he has moved back into his parent's home to save up for a deposit". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 30 July 2017.
  • From Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays: "Rose Robertson". The Telegraph. The Telegraph. Retrieved 29 September 2019.
  • From Stonewall (charity): Thomas, Kim (29 September 2020). "What are the new rules for teaching identity in schools?". The Telegraph. Retrieved 28 July 2021. As the number of children identifying as transgender has increased, schools have consulted trans charities such as Stonewall and Mermaids about how best to approach the topic. These charities have, however, come under criticism by campaigners, including Transgender Trend and Safe Schools Alliance, for reinforcing a rigid belief in gender roles, and for encouraging children who don't conform to gender stereotypes to believe they might be trans....For example, Stonewall guidance says that one way to identify that a child is transgender is that they "may come to school wearing clothes not typically associated with their assigned sex."
  • From Charles Fletcher-Cooke: "Sir Charles Fletcher-Cooke: obituary". The Telegraph. 28 February 2001. Retrieved 8 October 2012.
  • From Mermaids (charity): Thomas, Kim (29 September 2020). "What are the new rules for teaching identity in schools?". The Telegraph. Retrieved 28 July 2021. As the number of children identifying as transgender has increased, schools have consulted trans charities such as Stonewall and Mermaids about how best to approach the topic. These charities have, however, come under criticism by campaigners, including Transgender Trend and Safe Schools Alliance, for reinforcing a rigid belief in gender roles, and for encouraging children who don't conform to gender stereotypes to believe they might be trans....A large number of the organisations providing training and resources to schools on trans issues use non-conformity to gender stereotypes as evidence that a child is transgender. Mermaids, for example, regularly uses a chart showing gender identity on a 12-point spectrum from a Barbie wearing a pink dress to GI Joe in military fatigues.
  • From 2017 United Kingdom general election: Jack Maidment (10 June 2017). "Almost two-thirds of Conservative Party members want Theresa May to resign as Prime Minister". The Telegraph.
  • From 1982 Glasgow Hillhead by-election: Alan Cochrane, "Hillhead victory won a place in his heart[dead link‍]", The Daily Telegraph
  • From Batley and Spen (UK Parliament constituency): Boyle, Danny (16 June 2016). "Labour MP Jo Cox dies after being shot and stabbed in her constituency near Leeds". The Telegraph. Retrieved 16 June 2016.

Reference named "dnb":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 09:17, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Closeted politicians?

[edit]

Should a distinction be made for politicians listed who were not openly LGBT during their life? This could be added to the notes section of the table, rather than a new column. Alextheconservative (talk) 17:38, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:51, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

David Ashby

[edit]

I wonder if simply saying "retired" in the reason for leaving the House of Commons is misleading in the case of David Ashby, as, as his article notes, he was de-selected by his local Conservative Association. This meant he could not have fought the 1997 election as a Conservative, so it was something of a forced retirement. Dunarc (talk) 22:56, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Victor Grayson Party

[edit]

I think it is wrong to list Victor Grayson as Labour. His article notes although he was a member of the Independent Labour Party and elected under its banner, he "refused to sign the Labour Party constitution". His article merely lists him as ILP and the entry for his constituency - Colne Valley - lists him as Colne Valley Labour. The article for Colne Valley Labour further suggests that he was not an ILP or Labour Member of Parliament as neither officially backed him as a candidate when he was elected at the 1907 by-election or when he was defeated at the January 1910 General Election. I would therefore suggest re-labelling him as Colne Valley Labour if other editors are in agreement. Dunarc (talk) 22:59, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kirsty Blackman

[edit]

Kirsty Blackman last month posted that she is not straight. Worth including here? https://twitter.com/KirstySNP/status/1668923027151618049 WorthPoke2 (talk) 23:17, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Separate articles

[edit]

Separate articles like List of LGBT members of the United States Congress to avoid lagging  Rafael Ronen  16:42, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Archibald Primrose, 5th Earl of Rosebery

[edit]

I wonder if listing Rosebery here at the start under (and as the only entry in) "List of LGBT Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom" is helpful. The issue is while there has been discussion about Rosebery's sexuality, and as noted at his article, some historians like Michael Bloch would argue he fits this list, others have said the evidence is circumstantial and it is not clear how he himself viewed his sexuality. Perhaps a footnote noting that his sexuality remains the subject of debate would be of help? Dunarc (talk) 15:19, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_LGBT_politicians_in_the_United_Kingdom&oldid=1256359695"