This template is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology
This template was considered for deletion on 12 August 2005. The result of the discussion was "'No consensus'".
I feel as if Pansexuality should be listed as a sexual orientation rather than under related terms -- many pansexuals view their identity as its' own distinct orientation and numerous LGBT groups list it as such. NekomancerJaidyn (talk) 22:24, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's about the difference between sexual identity and sexual orientation. Non-academic sources sometimes conflate the terms, as people may in common speech, but they are not the same. As the pansexuality article makes clear, many sources consider it to be under the bisexual umbrella. Crossroads-talk-00:32, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have reverted edits that add Fictosexuality and Nijikon to the template.(diff) This is clearly overgranular, and Nijikon is not widely accepted as a sexual orientation, but I would also like to question whether Fictosexuality is even a genuine subject at all. If anybody wants to take a look and see what they think, please do. --DanielRigal (talk) 13:18, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]