Talk:Daniel Quasar

Hilarious

Hilariously this article contains a citation hidden behind a $50 paywall, discussing inclusion and monopolization and profiteering of the pride flag. I think its in poor form to hide citations behind paywalls, since other wiki editors cannot audit the citations for accuracy of the wiki article. Considering the citation is verifying Daniel Quasar as the original artist of the redesigning of the pride flag and Im here investigating claims of prior art. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:A601:A0C6:1200:1DE1:4D80:717A:E381 (talk) 12:09, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello! Its the journal that adds the paywall, not Wikipedia editors themselves. Access to articles depends on the kind of library access folks have. If you start editing consistently you can access the Wikipedia Library, which helps editors read articles like this. I do have access to the full article and would be happy to share the pdf with you Lajmmoore (talk) 04:20, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 August 2021 and 10 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): TravelerCosmos.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:47, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Question about reversal

May I ask what the Wikipedia standard is when the person in the article uses neopronouns? I have seen in the version history another person said that the established precedent is that if a person's pronouns are uncommon, use the person's name instead. However I've looked through the gender identity section of the manual of style and in other articles talking about writing about these topics and I haven't seen anything talking about that. Maybe I've missed it?

I do understand why you reversed the edit since I guess it would be confusing and hard to read for the layman. I kind of assumed it'd be okay because it was already at the top of the page that Quasar uses xe/xem/xyr pronouns. Do you think you can clarify why you reversed the edit and tell me how to go about this in the future? --Nyla Smokeyface (talk) 02:07, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Nyla Smokeyface. The relevant policies are MOS:IDENTITY and MOS:GENDERID. My understanding for articles such as Daniel Quasar is that we go with whatever recent reliable sources use, rather than whatever neopronouns the article subject may themselves use. After all, Wikipedia is a tertiary summary of what is written in (reliable) secondary sources, and we create biographies, not autobiographies. As far as I can determine in this case, reliable sources avoid using any pronouns, so this should be our approach. Edwardx (talk) 12:30, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Given that their own website genders them with "they" pronouns, I think that's acceptable (Daniel Quasar is a multi-disciplinary designer, artist, and musician out of Portland, OR. Their work has been featured around the world but before any of that, they were just a simple freelance designer trying to make interesting things. You can find out more about them at danielquasar.gay. from https://progress.gay/. I've updated the editnotice accordingly. Elli (talk | contribs) 22:03, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

White

Should the fact that Quasar is white be discussed somewhere? Or better yet, add a picture of them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:37A9:4000:4D7C:AC4F:7D24:7C0F (talk) 04:12, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

The flag went viral... None of the communities involved "approved" of it. How could they? Sadly, it is not impossible, that the people who made it viral and spread around the world are straight, cis and white. Not the designers fault in any ways, tho! Yet: It looks like a bipoc-trans-triangle that penetrates and splits an lgbtq-pride-rainbow. That might not be a message involved people want. Also, it's composition resembles the flags of some rather lgbtq-phobic countries, like the Bahamas, Sudan... The flag is not public domain, but copyrighted for commercial use (means any resale). All that would be worth discussing. But why on his page? 2001:A61:1228:C401:CDC2:5C11:A9ED:F422 (talk) 17:19, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Opening sentence

Why does the first sentence say that they are white? Is that nessacary? Is there some reason why this needs to be stated? I'm not mad im just genuinely asking as this is a very odd decision. NowInHD (talk) 13:22, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

I think it relates to the above comment "White" from the IP. Lajmmoore (talk) 19:29, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Removed content

The following unsourced content was added by @Jimburesch - since it was not supported with reliable sources, I've moved it here. Please add appropriate secondary sourcing to support the commentary in future. See WP:Reliable sources to find out the kind of places coverage can be considered from.
"There is a controversy surrounding Daniel Quasars design and it's use as a for profit business. It should be noted that the original designer of the Rainbow/Pride flag was Gilbert Baker who accepted no monetary compensation for his design and successfully fought attempts to copyright the flag for other people's personal gain."
Many thanks Lajmmoore (talk) 08:52, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

The issue is highlighted best by the Alliance of copywriters in this article,https://copyrightalliance.org/copyright-pride-progress/ and here again on ABC news San Francisco https://abc7news.com/progress-pride-flag-flyers-sf-castro-district-rainbow-lgbtq/12077610/

Gilbert Baker, a dear friend of mine, played a crucial role in the creation of the iconic LGBTQIA pride flag. As I reflect on how this symbol has grown and evolved, serving as a beacon of hope for countless individuals like myself from all corners of the globe, I am certain Gilbert would be delighted by its enduring impact. However, I am equally confident that he would not approve of a single individual monopolizing its copyright for personal profit.

When Gilbert had the opportunity to copyright his creation, he chose not to do so. This decision allowed others, such as Quasars, to create their own versions of the pride flag. Gilbert's vision encompassed inclusivity and the celebration of diversity, and he understood that the flag's meaning should remain accessible and malleable, able to adapt as needed.

As time goes on, societal changes may necessitate modifications to the flag. By resisting the constraints of copyright, we ensure that the flag can continue to evolve, representing the diverse experiences and identities within the LGBTQIA community. This flexibility enables new voices and perspectives to contribute to its design, keeping it relevant and reflective of the ongoing struggles and triumphs of our community.

Gilbert Baker's legacy as the flag's creator remains an integral part of its history, representing his passion for equality and liberation. As we move forward, it is essential that we honor his original intent and preserve the pride flag as a symbol of unity and resilience for generations to come by it not having copywrite protections and privileges.

I noticed other comments from other people than me, speaking to Quasars' race. Gilbert was a loving person and he didn't care about a person race. That's not relevant to me or the issue I'm raising for awareness. Jimburesch (talk) 16:33, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

This is fantastic thanks very much @Jimburesch for the sources - I've added a paragraph that I think meets these points, as well as others on the page, as well as adding some of these to the rainbow flag page too! Lajmmoore (talk) 06:52, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Lajmmoore I have messaged you on your user talk page. Please see that and reach out to me when you can. Thanks for your constant care of this page! Danielquasar (talk) 07:35, 17 July 2023 (UTC)