Talk:LGB

Describing LGB Alliance

@Void if removed: I have noticed that you have removed the designation of LGB Alliance as the hate group. The organization is widely recognized as the hate group:

The LGB Alliance has been described by the Labour Campaign for Trans Rights as transphobic, in a statement signed by a number of Labour MPs, and by articles in four scholarly journals as "trans-exclusionary" or "anti-trans". Hope not Hate and the Trades Union Congress have described the group as anti-trans. It has also been described by several members of parliament, journalists, and LGBT organisations and activists as a hate group. The group has received support from a number of UK politicians, including Boris Johnson, Rosie Duffield, Sarah Ludford and Joanna Cherry.
— LGB Alliance article

I think given it's reputation, the group can be recognized as such on the disambiguation page. Antitransphobe (talk) 19:30, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These are attributed statements. Describing a registered gay rights charity as a "hate group" in wikivoice is an entirely different thing. Please try and stick to WP:NPOV. Void if removed (talk) 21:39, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Void if removed is correct. We should not call LGB Alliance a ‘hate group’ in wikivoice unless reliable sources usually refer to them as a ‘hate group’. And they don’t, so we should not. Sweet6970 (talk) 11:30, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Given that there are at least four reliable sources describing LGB Alliance as a hate group on their article as "It has also been described by several members of parliament, journalists, and LGBT organisations and activists as a hate group.", I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be described as such, especially when it fits the definition of the hate group described here. Antitransphobe (talk) 13:26, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Those are attributed statements. There's a difference between "Person X called Y bad" and "Y is bad".

The test is how do reliable secondary sources refer to the subject in their own voice. Time and again they call them things like "charity", or "gay rights charity" or "campaign group". As I've pointed out on talk there, when the BBC, The Guardian, The Times, The Telegraph and The Independent all call them a charity and not a "hate group", that's your answer.

when it fits the definition of the hate group described here

That would be WP:OR. Void if removed (talk) 13:38, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The description of LGB Alliance as a hate group comes from their Wikipedia page, but for obvious reasons I didn't insert the references into the quotation onto this talk page. I don't see any reason when you'll have to scroll to the bottom of page to see references. This might not be a big issue right now, but in the future it is possible that more discussion will happen there. Here's the link to the article so that you can Ctrl-F for the first occurrence of the term "hate group".

On various media outlets, they are commonly criticized as a hate group, but in the conservative media, they are most commonly described as a "charity". WP:OR is probably out of the game, but I'm not sure if describing them as a hate group that can be a WP:NPOV issue. Antitransphobe (talk) 16:27, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We don’t describe them as a ‘hate group’ in the article on them. As has been explained above, our article says that other people have described them as a ‘hate group’. But on this page, if we were to say they are a ‘hate group’, then we would be saying that Wikipedia has made a judgment that they are a ‘hate group’. That would not be neutral. Sweet6970 (talk) 17:17, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]