Jump to content

Talk:LGBTQ-free zone/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

Title

Sources commonly write LGBT free zone[1][2][3][4][5], most common. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Violet Chains (talk • contribs) 08:03, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Here is the list of the 60 cities, municipalities, powiats and voivodships that adopted the resolution. Translated from Polish - Resolutions "..against LGBT ideology.."[1]
The newspaper stickers do not include the words 'against LGBT ideology' (whatever that is), and so irrespective of this or that council resolution, its obvious historical connection with Judenfrei is being watered down by limiting the title of this article to the pejorative 'ideology'. The political rhetoric enveloping Poland is both redolent and prescient of pogroms still in living memory.

The title is correct. The zones are referred by some foreign media as "LGBT free zones" instead "LGBT ideology-free zones," and that is already clearly stated in the lead of the article.GizzyCatBella🍁 08:44, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

The Polish for 'LGBT-free zone' appears to be 'Strefa wolna od LGBT' and this is the wording that is appearing on the signs. [ The signs do not wordily say "LGBT ideology-free zone" and so the title of this article should revert to 'LGBT-free zone'. This more generic title would thus allow for subheadings that include council resolutions and other promulgations to that effect. Conflation with Judenfrei is not alarmist, since designating an area to be "Free of LGBT+ people" (since the signs do not stipulate 'ideology' or 'iconography' per se), is an early manifestation of social exclusion and pogroms comparable with German erasure of citizenship for its Jewish minority. User:Chrisdevelop 20:32, 14 July 2020 (GMT)

This English Wikipedia and English media use LGBT free zone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Violet Chains (talk • contribs) 08:58, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Not all. The Washington Post for example correctly refers to it as "LGBT-ideology free" [2]
Can you adduce images of the signs from within Poland itself, that say 'Strefa wolna od ideologii LGBT' rather than merely 'Strefa wolna od LGBT'? User:Chrisdevelop 19:29, 14 July 2020 (GMT)
The article is not about the signs (read the article). There are no signs anywhere. The activist [3] mounted those signs on the road to fight homophobia and took pictures.[4] GizzyCatBella🍁 18:43, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
Nevertheless, the 'LGBT-free zone' material is being disseminated. User:Chrisdevelop 20;13, 14 July 2020 (GMT)

Some cities and provinces have declared themselves “LGBT-ideology free,” even though the declarations have no legal significance. We should reflect on what the correct name is per municipal resolution, and what media describe it is. This is correctly presented in the article.GizzyCatBella🍁 09:21, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

But not in the Title, per this thread. 'Ideology' is not only a non-neutral term in this context, it is loaded and pejorative, and should be placed in quotation marks in the Title. User:Chrisdevelop 10:30 15 July 2020 (GMT)
That’s what those politicians officially named the bill.[5] Declaration No. 1/19 of the Lesser Poland Regional Assembly of 29 April 2019 on opposition to the introduction of the LGBT ideology in local government communities - hence the title. Here is an article discussing the term [6] - What does LGBT ideology mean? Nothing. Such a creation does not exist. Local government officials were simply deceived (per source) - GizzyCatBella🍁 10:46, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
Surprisingly lucid, sane and useful article, thank you. Now returning to the Title. By any stretch of the imagination, the Title says this is an article on "Zones that are free of LGBT Ideology". It is not clear from the title that this is nothing more than the name of dozens of Polish bills - even after reading the article. If indeed this is all the articla is about, then it should be perhaps italicised, like Judenfrei, or re-titled, 'Polish LGBT ideology-free zones' or similar - to make it clearer that the concept of an 'LGBT ideology' is political. User:Chrisdevelop 12:59 15 July 2020 (GMT)
Sure, as long as the title doesn't suggest that the bill was intended to prohibit LGBT folks from accessing or living in the region, I have no objections.GizzyCatBella🍁 12:28, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

@User:Chrisdevelop - today’s news - [7] The Administrative Court in Radom today invalidated the resolution of the Commune Council in Klwów regarding the declaration Klwów free from the LGBT ideology GizzyCatBella🍁 13:00, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. That's extraordinary. One can only wonder where it leaves the newly elected President Duda. User:Chrisdevelop 21:13 15 July 2020 (GMT)

References

  1. ^ https://www.dw.com/en/european-parliament-slams-lgbti-free-zones-in-poland/a-51722613
  2. ^ https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2019/12/poland-pis-minorities-lgbtq/604255/
  3. ^ https://www.reuters.com/article/us-poland-lgbt-activist-sign/activist-aims-to-shame-polish-towns-opposed-to-lgbt-community-idUSKBN20125B
  4. ^ https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/02/25/third-of-poland-lgbt-free-zone-atlas-of-hate-homophobia/
  5. ^ https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-monday-edition-1.5458268/activist-fights-homophobia-in-poland-with-photo-series-of-lgbt-free-zones-1.5458271

Proposal to rename as 'LGBT-free zones'

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived: Merge proposed at Talk:LGBT ideology-free zone#Merger proposal A (non-admin closure) by Emir of Wikipedia (talk)

Please refer to discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#"LGBT ideology-free zones" in Poland following which consensus has been reached to remove the word 'ideology' from the Title. To vote in favour, please enter Rename along with any comment, and your User signature below. To vote against, please enter Retain along with your reason. User:Chrisdevelop 17:45, 19 July 2020 (GMT)

I am not really sure if that is consensus. What alternative(s) do your propose? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 16:51, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
Three votes in favour, none against so far, is certainly small, hence putting it up here for further discussion. The other alternatives that were so far considered were: 1. 'LGBT-free zones in Poland' 2. 'LGBT ideology-free zones in Poland' 3. Merge with the existing LGBT_rights_in_Poland#"LGBT_free_zones" that already duplicates the topic, and then possibly Merge the entire article with LGBT history in Poland. The Merge discussion should continue regardless of whether the Rename goes ahead. User:Chrisdevelop 18:40, 19 July 2020 (GMT)
Is your proposal to rename or move? The lack of clarity might come across to some as you just trying to get rid of the phrase LGBT ideology rather than making the best article(s), and having it named appropriately after the common name in English language sources. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 17:44, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
A search during the discussion showed that 'LGBT-free zones' was by far the most common usage in Poland, and outwith. Moreover, no-one has been able to define what 'LGBT ideology' is, so a move would be preferable, i.e. to merge to where the topic already exists in inverted commas at LGBT rights in Poland. Another alternative of a Rename to 'LGBT ideology-free zones in Poland' would allow the article to stand as is, while making it clear that the article Title is merely the title of the legislation passed by Polish regionial councils. Or, the currently proposed rename to 'LGBT-free zones' would on the other hand allow for inclusion of other countries that have comparable laws. If it is decided to restrict all this to Poland, then a Merge of all three articles could be considered. User:Chrisdevelop 18:54, 19 July 2020 (GMT)
As the article stands all the content is about Poland so it should not be renamed to "LGBT-free zones" on that basis alone. What would you propose the merged article could be called? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:04, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
If this article is to remain standalone and only about Poland, then it should be specifically renamed, either as 'LGBT ideology-free zones in Poland' or preferably 'LGBT-free zones in Poland' in keeping with most common usage in Poland. Otherwise, someone needs to define what 'LGBT ideology' is, if the article can ever be expanded. There is also a view espoused by President Duda among others, that 'LGBT' is ipso facto ideological. If the existing article were to be merged with LGBT rights in Poland, then it would merely flesh out the existing stem of the same name, so there would be no need for a new name. If the two major articles LGBT rights in Poland and LGBT history in Poland were merged, then it would be a matter for discussion as to which title should take precedence. 'History' being more generic, might be seen as preferable, since it naturally encompasses everything that happened to LGBT+ people in Poland, including matters of rights. User:Chrisdevelop 19:35, 19 July 2020 (GMT)
The LGBT ideology-free zone is a concept exclusive to Poland though. I do not have a problem against mergers to broader articles, but it seems like this might because you don't like the articles name rather than the content. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:56, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Retain - or Merge the entire article to LGBT history in Poland. My argumentation could be found in the earlier discussions on this talk page.GizzyCatBella🍁 19:25, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Rename or Merge.Whether an editor likes or dislikes a certain Title is of no consequence, and should not be a factor in determining whether the wording is the best fit for the topic. The pejorative 'LGBT ideology zones' is not in common usage in Poland in terms of these zones, it is only in the name of the bills. Stickers that have been distributed are stamped 'LGBT-free zone'. Since it has been agreed there is no such thing as LGBT ideology, the word should either be placed in inverted commas as it already is here, or removed, as per this proposal. Alternatively, the word 'Poland' should be added to the title so as to make 'LGBT-free zones in Poland' or 'LGBT ideology-free zones in Poland', since the article is, in fact, only about Polish LGBT-free zones. Otherwise, Merge. User:Chrisdevelop 21:49, 19 July 2020 (GMT)
  • Retain-the organisers of these zones made it clear they do not oppose LGBT people themselves, but rather the LGBT movement and what they believe to be LGBT ideology(as LGBT people do not equal the LGBT movement). Here are two reliable sources from mainstream news sources which describe what their intent was and what they believe to be "LGBT ideology", while distancing themselves from attempts to discriminate LGBT people themselves.
  • 1.[8]

Część samorządowców z Lubelszczyzny wystosowała właśnie apel do organizacji i instytucji unijnych pod hasłem "Uwolnijmy Europę od ideologii". Na konferencji prasowej przekonywali, że ich intencje związane z przyjmowaniem uchwał anty-LGBT zostały źle zrozumiane, bo nigdy nie byli przeciwko ludziom, ale przeciwko ideologii.Na spotkaniu z dziennikarzami udowadniali, że celem tej ideologii jest utopia. - Ta utopia oznacza przede wszystkim dyktaturę mniejszości nad większością. Jeżeli pozycja rodziny, która przynosi wielki dar życia i wychowania kolejnego pokolenia, jest poniżana i kwestionowana, to z całą pewnością jest to świat, którego nie chcielibyśmy oglądać w naszych wioskach i miastach. I to jest to niebezpieczeństwo, przed którym chcielibyśmy chronić - mówił Radosław Brzózka z zarządu powiatu świdnickiego. Ten powiat jako pierwszy w Polsce przyjął uchwałę anty-LGBT. Translation: Part of local politicians from Lubelszczyzna issued an appeal to organisations and European Union institutions under the slogan "Let's free Europe from ideology". During press conference they were explaining that their intention connected to issuing anti-LGBT proclamations were wrongly interpreted, because they never were against people, but against ideology.During the meeting with reporters they attested that the ideology has utopia as its goal-This utopia means first and foremost dictatorship of minority over majority. If position of family, which brings great gift of life and upbringing of new generations is humiliated and questioned, than most certainly this is a model which we wouldn't like to see in our villages and towns. And this is the danger we would like to protect from-said Radoslaw Brzozka from swidnicki district. This district was one of the first district who issued an anti-LGBT proclamation.

Andrzej Pruś podkreśla, że stanowisko przyjęte uchwałą w żadnym punkcie nie popierało wykluczania społecznego, dyskryminacji, szykanowania przedstawicieli środowisk LGBT, a jedynie miało na celu wyrażenie sprzeciwu i dezaprobaty wobec prób promocji ideologii opartej na afirmacji LGBT. Translation: Andrzej Prus underlines that the statement in no point at all supported social exclusion, discrimination or persecutions representatives of LGBT groups, andwas only intended to express opposition to attempts to promote ideology based on affirmation of LGBT. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 20:53, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

  • Rename or merge, per the discussion above. El Millo (talk) 21:05, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
    Facu-el Millo, rename to what or merge to what? This whole proposal has been unclear, and I would not blame any one who thinks it is just an attempt to get rid of the phrase LGBT ideology via any means possible, instead of moving or renaming based on Wikipedia policy. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:10, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
    Rename to either LGBT-free zone or LGBT-free zone in Poland, or merge to LGBT history in Poland. I said in the discussion above that I consider LGBT-free zone to be more natural and concise than LGBT ideology-free zone while still precise enough, and after a Google search it turned to actually be more commonly used. I'll leave it to the rest of the !voters to decide whether to include in Poland in the rename or whether to rename or merge, but I want my stance to be clear that LGBT-free zone seems preferable to LGBT ideology-free zone. El Millo (talk) 21:28, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
    Facu-el Millo There is now a Merge proposal below, where you can record your vote. Chrisdevelop (talk) 11:21, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
  • For the purposes of this article, what is the objective definition of 'LGBT ideology'? The citations given above indicate merely that LGBT ideology is the quest by the 'LGBT movement' for the same rights afforded to the heterosexual majority, which amounts to a nothingburger if LGBT+ Poles already have these equal rights. The citation source also claims that 'LGBT ideology is a 'quest for supremacy of the minority over the majority'. This claim is not supported in the source by any evidence that anyone is actually trying to do that. If 'equality' is what the Polish councils mean by 'ideology', then these zones are enforcing the very thing they say they do not support, i.e. stigmatisation. This means that if, as the sources above suggest, 'ideology' is merely a synonym for 'equality', then the councils oppose equality. One could thus just as easily call this article 'LGBT equality-free zone' since the terms of reference are interchangeable. 'Ideology' is any contemporary sense, a pejorative, and as such should be separated by inverted commas, or merging into the LGBT rights in Poland, where inverted commas are already used. User:Chrisdevelop 22:18, 19 July 2020 (GMT)
We don't make our names up, but follow the common name in the sources. Merges are not for getting rid of article titles. If this is merged then it should simply be a subsection in that article with this title as the title of the subsection. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:40, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
The common name appears to be 'LGBT-free zones' going by the report at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#"LGBT ideology-free zones" in Poland. It doesn't matter what private motivation this or that editor has for doing anything. If a merge, or a rename is the agreed best course of action then that should go ahead. There already exists a subsection at LGBT rights in Poland and so a merge to this makes sense. User:Chrisdevelop 22:52, 19 July 2020 (GMT)
At the time of this comment LGBT Rights in Poland is a redlink. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:59, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
Capitalisation typo - fixed now. User:Chrisdevelop 23:01, 19 July 2020 (GMT)
I am afraid Wikipedia is not the proper venue if you wish to discuss this with the organisers of this action, we only describe reality and events, but we do not shape or judge them.I am pretty sure you will find enough critical sources of this event that can be used.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 21:30, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
@User:Chrisdevelop - The entire comment of yours seems to be your WP:OR, really. The lawmakers called the legislation what they called it. "LGBT ideology-free zone" That's it. You can't substitute that with something else because you believe that "they called it this way," but actually "intended something else." Maybe just extend the lead explanation or just merge to "LGBT right in Poland" article. I don't know what else could be done here. GizzyCatBella🍁 21:39, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
This response was to the sources adduced by MyMoloboaccount, so not WP:OR. Since you are ok with a Merge, and that so far has the majority, if the majority is retained perhaps in a few days, it could go ahead. User:Chrisdevelop 22:44, 19 July 2020 (GMT)
Sure, just merge it. Also, perhaps update information regarding "LGBT ideology" at the same time.GizzyCatBella🍁 21:49, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
I would prefer a proper WP:MERGEPROP. Some people voted rename or merge and didn't clearly indicate a preference why. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:50, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
Agreed. See below. Chrisdevelop (talk) 22:36, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Declarations

Similiarly as in LGBT rights in Poland there is a problem here with "the LGBT free Zones" motions. This content may probably be improved, but the point that I think should be noted is that the name "LGBT free zone" is just a media label which doesn't really correspond with the actual text of these resolutions. It's true that these motions were described and received as homophobic. However they're neither actually called "LGBT-free zones" nor contain any statements of creating such thing. --Monsieur empereur (talk) 11:19, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Note there's a parallel discussion at Talk:LGBT rights in Poland#"LGBT-free zones". Reply either here or there, but let's try to keep the discussion in one place. François Robere (talk) 11:43, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

In the LGBT rights in Poland article, the heading is "LGBT-free zones" (in inverted commas) and these are talking about the same thing as this article, so there is inconsistent nomenclature. A search has already been conducted as to popular use, and 'LGBT-free zones' is what they're known as in Poland. If this article is to remain standalone, the title needs to be expanded to '"LGBT ideology-free zones" in Poland', importing from LGBT rights in Poland the inverted commas so as to make it clear it is the generic name of the Polish councils' resolutions, rather than that 'LGBT ideology' is 'a thing'. If it exists, then what is it? No-one has offered a robust definition, yet councils here, there and everywhere (e.g. Russia) are passing resolutions against it. Chrisdevelop (talk) 12:11, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
From the discussion at Talk:LGBT_rights_in_Poland#"LGBT-free_zones" it appears from the Polish sources cited that 'LGBT ideology-free zone' is not the one-size-fits-all name given by Polish councils. Chrisdevelop (talk) 12:19, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
At https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/15yrxAGCj9RKop_IBz35OuD5KKylSIHUVnpfJ2b5W8Xg/edit#gid=4303681 is a partial list of Polish towns with international twin-city arrangements, that have purportedly passed anti-LGBT resolutions. Intitial investigation shows that they're not all called 'LGBT ideology-free zones', and in the case of Wieluń, the mayor, Paweł Okras, in open reply to an open letter from Piotr Piwowarczyk, implicitly denied the council had ever passed such a resolution, saying, "I can assure you that you will not meet stigmatization due to your sexual orientation. Wieluń is an open and tolerant city."
Biała Podlaska
Bielski (county)
Dębica
Jaroslawski (county)
Kraśnik
Łódzkie voivodeship
Łódzkie, Lubelskie, Podkarpackie and Świętokrzyskie voivodeship
Łososina Dolna
Lubelski (county)
Lubelskie and Świętokrzyskie voivodeship
Lubelskie voivodeship
Małopolskie voivodeship
Mielec
Nowa Dęba
Opole Lubelskie
Opole Lubelskie city
Podkarpackie voivodeship
Poniatowa
Przemyśl
Puławy
Puławy (city)
Rypin
Stary Sącz
Świdnik
Świętokrzyskie voivodeship
Sztumski (county)
Tomaszów Mazowiecki
Tuchów
Wieluń
Wielunski (county)
woj. lubelskie
Żabno
Zakrzówek
Zamość
Zwierzyniec
Chrisdevelop (talk) 01:26, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
It may be right that Polish legislation uses different more legalese terms, but as lined out in the WP policy per WP:COMMONNAME we should use the most recoginzable and commonly used English term from the sources the article is built on. By my understanding the term "LGBT Free Zones" is unequivocally used by the international press, so we should go with that. It's the same reason we have an article called Taiwan, despite the fact that there is no such country and the correct legalese term is actually the "Republic of China". Dead Mary (talk) 18:24, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
That ^ . François Robere (talk) 19:22, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
If the title is changed to "LGBT-free zones", the inverted commas used at Talk:LGBT_rights_in_Poland#"LGBT-free_zones" should also be used in the title of this article.Chrisdevelop (talk) 19:51, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
@Chrisdevelop: Thanks for the info, but what's the point of the list..? François Robere (talk) 19:22, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
@François Robere: The list is provided as a courtesy to spare editors the tedium of looking for Polish towns with international twin-city treaties, that have passed anti-LGBT ordinances, and in the process to allow anyone with time on their hands to research the name that each regional council gave their resolution. The example provided of Wieluń shows that the name doesn't necessarily match the title of this article, which has been being defended as the one-size-fits-all title of the resolutions. The word of contention, "ideology", is omitted when discussed at Talk:LGBT_rights_in_Poland#"LGBT-free_zones", where it is instead called "LGBT-free zones" (including "so-called" style inverted commas). That would make a better title for this article, and it would moreover permit the inclusion of countries other than Poland. If the article is to remain solely about Poland, then it could be renamed, '"LGBT-free zones" in Poland', thereby importing the inverted commas from LGBT rights in Poland and at the same time, indicating these zones are a particular phenomenon in Poland. Chrisdevelop (talk) 19:48, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

What is 'LGBT ideology'?

This invariably pejorative term is used in the article title as though it is an accepted (and acceptable) term, yet there is no Wikipedia article with this title. Can this be clarified? There is an article in the Krakow Post that may provide a useful start. User:Chrisdevelop 23:35, 14 July 2020 (GMT)

No such thing exists. It’s the same mechanism as with calling antisemitism a “fight against Zionist ideology”. Trasz (talk) 22:39, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Just because you claim something does not exist, does not make it so. LGBT activism is very much real; just as the push-back against it. -69.121.10.105 (talk) 03:39, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
I think you misread Trasz. LGBT activism exists because of a broad liberal ideology, not a uniquely LGBT ideology; trying to paint it as the latter is merely a cover for intolerance of LGBT people (see eg. the quotes here). François Robere (talk) 05:22, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
The issue with the title in that case, is that it declares there are "zones" in Poland "free of LGBT 'ideology'", thereby implying that it is 'a thing', without defining what 'LGBT idedology' actually is in this context, even if only from the perspective of the councils outlawing it. This needs to be fleshed out in the article itself, and perhaps ironic quotation marks added to some part of the title. User:Chrisdevelop 01:21, 15 July 2020 (GMT)
I agree. WP:TITLE suggests we should either accept it as common in Polish, but reject it as non-neutral and uncommon in English. François Robere (talk) 05:22, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I suggest starting an article on the LGBT ideology, which I agree is a loaded term used by politicians. It is already discussed in some scholarly research, check for example the The fight against ‘gender’ and ‘LGBT ideology’: new developments in Poland. Also see pl:Gender#Kontrowersje_w_Polsce for a related topic. PS. Also see https://www.encyklopedia.edu.pl/wiki/Ideologia_gender but I am not sure if this a reliable source. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:25, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
So basically another Moon landing. François Robere (talk) 05:28, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
It is not clear from the title that it is nothing more than the published name of dozens of Polish bills - even after reading the article. If indeed this is all the articla is about, then it should be perhaps italicised, like Judenfrei, or re-titled, 'Polish LGBT ideology-free zones' or similar - to make it clearer that the concept of an 'LGBT ideology' is political. As it stands, the Title says the article ia about "zones that are free of LGBT ideology", suggesting that LGBT ideology exists, albeit undefined, and that it is being 'dealt with'. User:Chrisdevelop 13:01 15 July 2020 (GMT)
@Chrisdevelop: Quotation marks? François Robere (talk) 18:12, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
@François Robere: To denote a 'so-called' phrase. There isn't a single, accepted 'LGBT ideology'. It's a politically pejorative term connoting bad-faith, and implies there is a powerful, central controlling infiltration of social infrastructures, encapsulated in a malfeasant, so-called 'ideology'. Quotation marks don't normally appear in Titles so another possibility might be simply to expand it to 'Polish LGBT ideology-free zones'. User:Chrisdevelop 21:24, 15 July 2020 (GMT)
It's a politically pejorative term connoting bad-faith Chrisdevelop, the term LGBT ideology has been also used by representatives of liberal anti-clerical movement as well, in positive sense[10], we actually have article on the author[11]. I also note it used by some scholarly sources, for example Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services Marriage, Civil Unions, or Reciprocal Beneficiary Agreements: What Best Protects Older LGBT People? Kelly Knochel from University of Minnesota Assimilationist LGBT ideology views marriage as having a positive, steadying influence on relationships, improving the health and safety of LGBT people by promoting stability and monogamy (Adam, 2003; Yep et al.,2003) or in Gender in Philosophy and Law[12]To disagree with the ‘LGBT ideology’, to disapprove of it or not consider it justified, does not mean to legitimise intolerance, violence, hatred or unfair discriminations: instead it means to distinguish equally between recognisable rights and rights which demand a differentiation. Finally, it seems it is also used by the far left movement, ie. Communist Party of Great Britain identity politics and the transgender trend:where is lgbt ideology taking us?'[13]. No comment on the article, but the use of the term is certainly not restricted to negative view and used not only by conservatives.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 00:39, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
@MyMoloboaccount: Quotes and full citations please. François Robere (talk) 15:22, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
@Chrisdevelop: No argument there. What I meant - perhaps we can use quotation marks in the title rather than italics? François Robere (talk) 15:14, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
@MyMoloboaccount: From your first article: "The word 'ideology' has a pejorative meaning in modern language. It means a set of strong, bossy beliefs about a just and just social system and lifestyle that should be promoted and implemented by all means - not necessarily democratic. In the language of the Church, this [...] means that the name 'ideology' applies only to false and immoral beliefs. The Catholic system is not called ideology, because by its very nature it is only right..." Your second article does not mention the acronym, and your third is to a book - can you please cite the relevant part(s)? Your fourth link is to a lengthy paper that examines why there is negativity towards LGBT+ 'ideology, mainly from the transgender perspective. None of your references appear to support your claim of a positive connotation for the pejorative, 'LGBT ideology'. Do you have more specific citations to support a positive connotation for 'LGBT ideology' to save the time of lengthy reading that may turn up nothing? User:Chrisdevelop 19:58, 16 July 2020 (GMT)
@François Robere: Quotation marks appear to be part of the Title format coding, and probably aren't part of the housestyle, hence the suggestion of italics. Another possiblity is to merge with LGBT history in Poland and LGBT rights in Poland to build a bigger article, of which this could be a section. Or, one could build a bigger article on LGBT Ideology, and include other countries such as Russia, that also outlaw 'Gay Propaganda'. User:Chrisdevelop 20:00, 16 July 2020 (GMT)
@Chrisdevelop: I don't think a merge would be right, given the particularity of the phenomenon and the size of this article. I also don't think "LGBT Ideology" would make much sense, given the fact it doesn't exist as such; and while we could start an article on the misconception (see my comment on the Moon landing above), I'm not sure it would be the right course of action here and it would only be extending the naming problem.
My problem with italics is that their semantics aren't clear; in other words, a lay reader may not understand that they signal fabrication rather than simply being an aesthetic choice. François Robere (talk) 21:19, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
@François Robere: Judenfrei is in italics because it's "German words and phrases". Apostrophes are reserved for formatting, so maybe cannot be used in Titles. Perhaps another editor can clarify. At the very least there should be a paragraph in this article that discusses what 'LGBT ideology' actually is, or is perceived to be. The issue with the current title, is that it gives the term 'LGBT Ideology' inappropriate legitimacy, given that "it doesn't exist". A renaming of this article to "Polish LGBT ideology-free zones" would obviously give it particularity to Poland's legislation, but in the process would omit Russia and former Soviet satellites that manifest comparable, and intensifying national animus towards their LGBT demographics, enacted both legislatively and socially. There is a heading further up this Talk page on 'Title' and perhaps this aspect of the discussion should move back to there. User:Chrisdevelop 23:53, 16 July 2020 (GMT)
Difference is "Judenfrei" is in a foreign language (German), so the semantics are clearer.
I agree about the need for an explanation.
I've posted on WP:NPOVN to get some more feedback. François Robere (talk) 10:49, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
My comment is at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#"LGBT ideology-free zones" in Poland. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:23, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

The most noticable characteristic of political correctness, is that those accused of engaging in it almost always dispute it even exists, also the accuser never thinks that there is anything 'correct' about PC, they are ascribing motive to the accused. Nonetheless it is the term used. Similarly, it is difficult to understand what on earth was supposedly 'un-American' about the activites investigated by HUAC, nonetheless again it was the term used. We cannot put topics in quotes because we think the terms make little sense TO US. AFAI can see 'LGBT ideology-free' and 'LGBT free' are both terms used by critics of these declarations to describe policies which the actual enacters refer to by euphemisms, pro-family or similar. I fully understand the wish to not give credit to beliefs and prejudices which probably do not exist outside the imaginations of accusers, but quote marks etc are not the way forward IMO.Pincrete (talk) 12:41, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Please check out a new article LGBT ideology just created by User:Buidhe. Chrisdevelop (talk) 19:11, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Confederate flag in Poland

In the US there are a small minority of people who mistakenly believe that the Confederate flag is some type of "southern pride" or "heritage" symbol. However, if someone is displaying it halfway around the world (!) it is hard to believe that they are not some kind of white supremacist. Note: apparently several times as many Poles fought on the Union side [14] (t · c) buidhe 16:55, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

@User talk:Buidhe Can you change that caption for me? I’m not sure how do do it. GizzyCatBella🍁 17:07, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
They probably are "white supremacists" but we should not assume that ourselves simply because one of them is holding a Confederate flag. What about people standing next to the flag? We don’t know if they are with the person hiding behind the flag.GizzyCatBella🍁 17:17, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
I concur that the person holding the flag is likely someone with an agenda, but nonetheless, can we rule out that they are just fond of the Southern heritage or such? I am again reminded of the Nazi chic in Asia, there are people here who think SS was just "cool" because they had "cool uniforms", and don't know anything about Holocaust and such. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:31, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was Don't merge. Stonkaments (talk) 18:47, 19 August 2020 (UTC) (non-admin closure)

Per discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard#"LGBT_ideology-free_zones"_in_Poland and Talk:LGBT_ideology-free_zone#Proposal_to_rename_as_'LGBT-free_zones' proposal to merge LGBT ideology-free zone into LGBT rights in Poland. The current article is solely about 'LGBT ideology-free zones' in Poland, and thus would be better situated as a satellite within the parent article, complementing the existing section LGBT rights in Poland|"LGBT_free_zones". Please indicate Agree or Oppose with your reasons and ID. Chrisdevelop (talk) 22:31, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Nope, I am entirely unconvinced and I disagree with your assessment of this matter that appears to be (WP:OR and factually incorrect. The article follows the language used by the lawmakers and is properly summarized without OR, we follow top-quality sources here. We should use a direct quote from the legislation itself, exact and precise. Proper name is clearly identified in the text, is extensively sourced. I will further note that other names are already in our other article so it should be merged. GizzyCatBella🍁 21:06, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@Guy Macon, Trasz, JzG, Aquillion, and Facu-el Millo: Pinging editors who took part in the other discussions and may want to opine here as well. François Robere (talk) 10:15, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

* Yes, it was partially translated from english, but that article was heavily expanded since then. We should probably remove that template since most of the article is original work. Matinee71 (talk) 18:45, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
I don't think we should. It maybe for copyright attribution reasons. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:55, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
Emir of Wikipedia Just to clarify: the talk page notice is not for copyright reasons; it is merely a nice-to-have. The WP:COPYRIGHT page states Wikipedia's licensing requirements, and the required notice must be in the edit summary (see WP:TFOLWP). If is not already in the edit summary, the talk page notice is not sufficient replacement; instead, WP:RIA describes what must be done. And must here is not guideline, or policy-level, which is merely should-level; it is a legal requirement. And unlike policy and guidelines, for which pl-wiki has its own set and therefore their policies govern there, not en-wiki's, legal requirements are different because Wikimedia is based in the U.S. and thus U.S. legal requirements obtain to all Wikipedias. Mathglot (talk) 23:06, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

===Closing Tally===

  • Agree 5 votes
  • Oppose 2 votes
  • Rename 3 votes (2 including Merge option)
  • Retain name 2 votes (1 including Merge option)

The Merge will now go ahead to LGBT_rights_in_Poland#"LGBT_free_zones", and there is no need to change the existing name that is currently in the merged-to article. Please allow time (a day or so) for the task to be completed. Chrisdevelop (talk) 13:54, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

The "LGBT rights in Poland" article is already far too long per WP:LENGTH. There is no way to properly integrate this article into the main LGBT article in an appropriate manner. "LGBT free zones" is a distinct topic which is getting a lot of coverage in major RS for a long time now and there is ample evidence that this is going to continue to be a significant topic in the future. Pretty ridiculous move to be honest. Also why was this poposal not posted to somewhere more prominent (such as WP:RFC or some of the taskforces), so more editors could partake in the discussion? Dead Mary (talk) 14:33, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
@Dead Mary: What do you think of the merger? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 15:57, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
LGBT Free Zones and the general LGBT history of Poland are two very seperate topics. The LGBT Free Zones are a long enduring topic which has been making major international headlines for quite some time now. There are a lot of political and diplomatic developments which in turn get extensively covered by a heap of RS. Just yesterday the EU started to put some measures into effect, withholding EU funds for some of the affected Polish cities. It's very clear that the EU-Poland spat here is going to continue with further developments down the line. This topic is going to grow and the main LGBT Poland article is already overloaded as mentioned before. It will not be possible to adequately cover this topic within the limiting frameworks of the 100 years spanning main Poland-LGBT article. A separate article for the LGBT free zones is definitely warranted and I oppose any merger measures. Dead Mary (talk) 10:22, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
@Dead Mary: Since the merger proposal arose out of failure to reach consensus over a name change for this article, to either "LGBT-free zones" (including the inverted commas presently used at LGBT_rights_in_Poland#"LGBT_free_zones" to clarify LGBT ideology is "so-called" and is the name used by some Polish councils), or '"LGBT ideology-free" zones', or 'LGBT-free zones in Poland' or '"LGBT ideology-free" zones in Poland' (importing the inverted commas as above), it may be worth reconsidering a name-change. Further down this page, under 'Declarations' is evidence that 'LGBT ideology-free zone' is not the name given by all Polish councils, nor in the Polish vernacular, and the term 'LGBT-free zone' is what is used on the stickers sold by Polish newspapers. Currently this article is solely about Polish LGBT free zones, not all the councils are using the term 'LGBT ideology-free zones', the vernacular use is 'LGBT-free zones', and there is to date, no robust definition for what 'LGBT ideology' actually is. For all these reasons, a name change should be reconsidered. As regards the concerns about bloat of LGBT rights in Poland since it already exceeds the maximum allowable length of 100Kb, the article LGBT history in Poland could be considered as a merge target, since it is currently less then 40Kb, and could be improved by the integration of this article.Chrisdevelop (talk) 14:54, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
I understand your reasoning, but merging the articles is not the answer; especially when the initial issue was just the name. This topic warrants its own article. Regarding the title we should just use standard WP policy as outlined by WP:COMMONNAME. Looking into the media coverage the commonly used term is "LGBT Free Zones", so the article should moved there accordingly. Dead Mary (talk) 18:15, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

I agree with Dead Mary. The discussion was closed prematurely and possibly in violation of WP:NACINV (the closing user, Chrisdevelop, is the same person who started the merger discussion). DraconicDark (talk) 17:52, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Close reverted. Chrisdevelop, you may not close your own contested merge proposal and discussions are not a vote. Fences&Windows 22:16, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
FYI, a deletion debate in November closed as keep: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LGBT-free zone. Fences&Windows 22:33, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
Deepfriedokra LGBT rights in Poland currently exports to 18 pages PDF, and this article to 13. Assuming a lot of duplicate information would coalesce in a merge, e.g. shared external references, the expanded article would probably reach 24 pages or so. If 24 pages is an "excessively long article", what should be done about Brian Eno (36 pages) and others like it? Chrisdevelop (talk) 16:55, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
Interesting. That's not what I got by a factor of ten. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:36, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
@Chrisdevelop: FWIW, this page shows 42,000 bytes and this page shows 110,000, while this guideline says "> 100 kB almost certainly should be divided." --Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:48, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
Deepfriedokra And Brian Eno [115,828 bytes,] (113Kb) alongside many others that significantly exceed the maximum. Given that it's already too large, what sections should LGBT rights in Poland be split into? The other article that has been proposed to merge to is LGBT history in Poland, whose page length is 40,470 bytes (39Kb). falling well within the size allowance. Chrisdevelop (talk) 22:01, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

This merge proposal arose out of the discussion of a proposal for a name change (which may itself have been prematurely closed), so as to remove the word 'Ideology' from the Title, since no-one is able to define for encyclopedic purposes what 'LGBT Ideology' is. In the 'LGBT rights in Poland' article, the title for the section dealing with this, is "LGBT-free zones" (in inverted commas), not 'LGBT ideology-free zone' as for this article. It has already been pointed out that the current title for this article is the name the Polish councils banning so-called 'LGBT ideology' collectively gave to their resolutions (so it should be in inverted commas anyway), however the popular use in Poland is "LGBT-free zones" placed in "so-called" inverted commas, and that is what the heading is for this topic in the article 'LGBT rights in Poland'. Since this article is only about 'LGBT-ideology free zones' in Poland, then the title should be amended to '"LGBT ideology-free zones" in Poland' (copying the "so-called" inverted commas from the parent article) or '"LGBT-free zones" in Poland'. If on the other hand countries other than Poland are to be considered, then the title should be 'LGBT-free zones' or '"LGBT-free zones"'. Otherwise, someone needs to write a paragraph or an article explaing what 'LGBT ideology' is. In terms of a merger, pruning of duplicated material and integration with other aspects of the issue of LGBT rights in Poland would lessen the likelihood of bloating the parent article. There is another article LGBT history in Poland, to where it has also been suggested this article could be merged.Chrisdevelop (talk) 10:47, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

The name change proposal was closed because you opened this merge proposal. Really the name change proposal should have been a move proposal in my view. Defining 'LGBT ideology' is irrelevant, we use the name in the sources not our own. If the 'LGBT rights in Poland' section title doesn't match this article we can update it. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 10:57, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
Reply below, under LGBT_ideology-free_zone#Declarations Chrisdevelop (talk) 12:14, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

I would oppose the merger. I understand that the discussion on LGBT free zone do fit under the larger rubric of LGBT rights in Poland. However, it is also clear that the LGBT free zone has generated enough attention, discussion and controversy to merit an article dedicated to this topic. By merging, the topic cannot be properly fleshed out without disrupting the sober, historical perspective of the broader issue of LGBT rights in Poland, and without falling afoul of WP:RECENTISM. On the other hand, if the topic is to be shoehorned into the latter, it will not receive the full, balanced treatment that it deserve.

The topic can be given brief mention in the article on LGBT rights in Poland, while at the same time, having an article on its own. I don't see why the two cannot coexist. HollerithPunchCard (talk) 00:33, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Strong oppose The subject, unfortunately, received widespread coverage in international media and easily meets WP:GNG and WP:NEVENT. It has had significant impact, such as EU-Poland relations and twin cities. I also support renaming to "LGBT-free zones". (t · c) buidhe 19:16, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
    • Furthermore, "LGBT rights in Poland" is not an appropriate merge target as these zones do not change anyone's legal rights. (t · c) buidhe 19:36, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
      • LGBT rights in Poland has already been ruled out on the grounds it currently exceeds the maximum allowed length of 100,000 bytes, and may itself need to be broken up. However LGBT history in Poland has also been proposed as a merge target, and has enough room to accommodate a merge. This merge proposal arose out of failure to reach consensus on removing the word 'ideology' from the Title, since it is not present here: LGBT rights in Poland|"LGBT_free_zones" where "so-called" inverted commas are used, as they should also be in the Title here. Several alternative names have been proposed, including '"LGBT-free zones" in Poland', (eliminating 'ideology' and including inverted commas) if this article is to remain standalone. If there is no infringement of rights resulting from these zones, why would anyone be objecting to them?Chrisdevelop (talk) 20:34, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
        • I think it would unbalance the LGBT history in Poland article with excessive recent material; we are talking about hundreds of years of history. I oppose any merge. To your other point, here in the US someone can wave Nazi flags in front of my house without breaking any laws or changing my legal rights, but I would still find it strongly objectionable. (t ·
          • The peaceful marches by LGBT+ demonstrators appear to be solely for equal civil rights, which currently they do not enjoy in Poland. This is therefore clearly a rights issue, but just as clearly, it can't splice into the LGBT rights in Poland originally proposed, because since it exceeds the allowable maximum of 100,000 bytes, that article is already in need of splitting. `Chrisdevelop (talk) 23:09, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

c) buidhe 21:23, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

TALLY

  • Agree = 5
  • Oppose = 7
  • Majority - 2 opposing

Since the Rename>Move proposal has succeeded, this Merge appears no longer necessary. Can someone please WP:CLD? Chrisdevelop (talk) 07:23, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

This is not a vote. The move proposal is irrelevant, we can still merge if needed. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 16:55, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
How was the vote for the successful Move proposal taken, if not by tallying the bolded Support v. Oppose responses? Chrisdevelop (talk) 23:54, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
BTW there is a Merge proposal now active for the LGBT ideology article to merge with Anti-gender movement Chrisdevelop (talk) 23:56, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
LGBY ideology was not one of the proposed merged targets, but I can add a tag for that. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 10:39, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
What did you mean by "this is not a vote"? Chrisdevelop (talk) 10:57, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
Sorry I meant LGBT not LGBY. Wikipedia:NOTAVOTE is an explanatory supplement to the Wikipedia:Consensus and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not policies. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 11:01, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Wrong map in lead

See my comment here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=LGBT-free_zone&diff=979361753&oldid=978709949

I have only tagged it as such there for now. Zezen (talk) 09:19, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

It's not wrong, the sources are from 2019 but the map depicts the situation in 2020. Updated source added. (t · c) buidhe 14:51, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for not engaging in a revert war and removing these conflicting sources. Updating as per your new source then, t · c) buidhe.

Zezen (talk) 18:50, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Cleary NPOV and false

LGBT free zone is a term made by leftwing activists and publicists for regions where local governments signed acts about family support. This doesn't belong on the encyclopedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.173.49.37 (talk) 17:24, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Not true. If you read those acts, there's nothing there that would in any way help families. It all revolves around hate against LGBT. Calling it "family support" is like neofascist bands calling themselves "rock against communism".Trasz (talk) 00:59, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Newspapers have been distributing 'LGBT-free zone' stickers ('STREFA WOLNA OD LGBT'), which have presumably been put up on noticeboards and lamposts. Moreover Poland has just elected, on an anti-LGBT platform, the right-wing President Duda who says "LGBT ideology is worse than communism"; the 'LGBT free zone' signs are representative of a growing animus against LGBT+ minorities, coupled with a marked swing away from secular rule, and towards Catholicism as quasi state religion. This is not associated with the contemporary 'left' or 'moderate' wings of political discourse. User:Chrisdevelop 23:25, 14 July 2020 (GMT)
Reading and forming your own opinion about this is ORIGINAL RESEARCH. Better show proof that the map in this article represents governments that passed legislation that mentions LGBT people or so-called "LGBT ideology" at all. Otherwise - which seems to be the case - this article is just propaganda. Nothing new really, on wikipedia. It's really hard to enforce real npov here. 20:52, 30 September 2020 (UTC)Vealoshawa (talk)

Should this article be at least semi-protected?

This is an ongoing issue and it is very controversial-so I think the article security should be raised. --BonsMans1 (talk) 14:17, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

LGBT free zone is a metaphor

There are no LGBT free zones in Poland. The following description was removed: Warning:as the map contains are 3 layers of administrative division, red mark doesnt mean that the resolution is passed on commune level. [1] Another removed content: LGBT-free zones (Polish: Strefy wolne od LGBT)[2] [3] [4] [5] [6][7] or LGBT ideology–free zones (Polish: Strefy wolne od ideologii LGBT)[8] is an artistic happenning organised by Bart Staszewski in order to shame the communes, which have their councils pass so called Family Right resolutions. The resolutions could be passed on 3 different levels of administrative division (municipalities, counties and regions of Poland) and allegedly contain content unwelcoming of an alleged "LGBT ideology",[9] --Cautious (talk) 21:24, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

That may be your opinion but most reliable sources in English do call them LGBT free zones hence the title. For example, these three academic papers discuss LGBT free zones in Poland[15][16][17] I believe the article already says that the relevant municipalities officially reject the term "LGBT-free zones". (t · c) buidhe 21:30, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Really? TRZEBIESZOW, Poland (Reuters) - An activist has begun photographing members of Poland’s LGBT community next to a fake “LGBT-free zone” sign outside towns that passed motions rejecting what they call “LGBT ideology” or defending traditional family values. This is the source, already there. --Cautious (talk) 21:36, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

3 points to improve the article

1. Clearly state the status of the zone. 2. Improve the map in order to distinguish between resolutions on different levels of the administrative division. I.e. when the resolution was passed on the region level, but not on commune level. 3. Clearly describe the consequences, together with distinction from the level of administrative division.--Cautious (talk) 11:59, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

There are no LGBT free zones in Poland

There are no zones in Poland where gays or lesbians could not live. Some local authorities passed a resolution to defend traditional family values. That is all. --Adam Lutostański (talk) 18:31, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes there are zones in Poland where the mere existence of LGBT people is called "an ideology". If Polish people are so bothered by the presence of these resolution they should try to have them removed instead of unnecessarily trying to convince others that they do not exist. :)--95.248.253.145 (talk) 17:27, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
Sticking to facts, LGBT-free zones across Poland are analogous in intent to Judenfrei. The fact you "can live" in a place does not necessarily mean you have freedom of the city enjoyed by the majority. Supported by the majority, and apparently by the OP, President Duda has denounced the LGBT+ demographic as an ideological construct: 'Polish election: Andrzej Duda says LGBT 'ideology' worse than communism'.Chrisdevelop (talk) 00:18, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Looking ahead.

Ya'll might want to consider having this article semi-protected. Determined banned editors will likely create socks & continue with their disruption. GoodDay (talk) 22:53, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

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

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) 20:52, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:LGBTQ-free_zone/Archive_2&oldid=1261413626"