Talk:LGBTQ in Guatemala
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the LGBTQ in Guatemala article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
 | It is requested that an image or photograph of LGBTQ in Guatemala be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible. Wikipedians in Guatemala may be able to help! The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
[edit]
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Janislaw20.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:48, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Feedback
[edit]Dear Group Members,
My article is an overview of what it is like to be an LGBT individual living in Guatemala; the goal of my Wikipedia article is to inform readers about LGBT life in Guatemala. The article as of right now is split into an overview, attitudes towards the LGBT community, attacks towards sexual minorities, and healthcare.
My questions are: Does my overall structure seem to flow? (I do not think so). Does my information seem biased? (It is so frustrating that the article has to remain neutral). Is there any wording that seems off? Do I seem redundant at times? Does my information seem relevant? If not, what specifically and how would you approach changing it? Does my information seem to be all over the place?
Dearest Josh,
I think the structure of Wikipedia articles put a little less emphasis on flow since they are predominantly fact based and do not really need to pull together an argument, so I wouldn't worry about the flow of your article. I think your subsections and the order they are in make sense, although I would maybe split up the section labeled "Guatemala's Attitudes Towards the LGBT Community" into like religious persecution and governmental attitudes / policies just to be a bit more clear. Yes your information is super relevant!!! I think it would be helpful to make some connections between the information in your article. For example, you write about the lack of sex ed in Guatemala and I think you can relate that to the Catholic Church and role of religion in Guatemalan society. I think it would help to contextualize your information a bit better. I don't think you seem redundant, you might just want to group all things relating to the State's attitude toward LGBT people so readers know that this is the Guatemalan government's views and not just public attitudes. My biggest note would be the word choice / language of your article. "fails to protect" you should try to be more neutral like "has not pursued investigation of crimes" and if you can find a statistic that backs it up then that is perfect. You also can just delete some of your phrases to make the information you present more objective. Like when you are talking about Stephen Murray's study you can just eliminate "The results were profound" and state his findings instead of offering your opinion that they were profound. You are a star!
-Carina CarinaFlaherty (talk) 00:55, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Violence statistics
[edit]The article mentions " It was reported from 1996 to 2006 that at least thirty-five LGBT individuals were murdered." It's difficult to put this into context without additional information. What is the incidence of murder per 100,000 per year in the general population? One problem in any country is trying to establish the number or percent of trans-identified people in the population, so as to make sense out of these statistics. For example: if 3,500 people were killed in Guatemala from 1996-2006, and trans* folk are 1% of the population, then the murder rate targeting trans* individuals is exactly in line with that of the general population. If other countries are any guide, we expect that the rate is much higher, but additional informatin is required in order to be able to interpret it. Mathglot (talk) 01:44, 7 July 2017 (UTC)