Talk:Pride in London

This article 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 articles

London Mid‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 January 2019 and 10 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kyoungp. Peer reviewers: PstMar23.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 07:10, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Spammy

This article is filled with spammy phrases and in places is simply a puff piece. I tagged it as such, but the tag was wrongly removed by an editor who says that the advert tag can't be added by an anon. Let me tell you now, TruthMonkey: it bloody well can be. Don't remove it again without sorting the article's terrible tone. I'm going to Pride this year as I usually do, but if I want corporate spiel I'll go to Pride's website. If I want neutral facts, I *should* be able to come to Wikipedia for it. 80.176.233.6 (talk) 16:41, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you believe the article is not NPOV then it would be in the spirit of Wikipedia to make (even brief suggestions) here as to why to help editors improve it. Articles about events can be difficult to to find a NPOV but this article does contain a lot of cited material so should not be condemed wholesale. Truthmonkey (talk) 11:11, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References

This section does not appear to be a citation. Is it a book about the event? More detail should be provided. Truthmonkey (talk) 11:12, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is cross cited from the Footnotes section and so is a citation. See WP:Manual of Style (layout)#Notes and References. The book is an account of the history of UK gay rights groups including the Pride events and marches. Fæ (talk) 11:19, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Pride London. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:54, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Numbers 2017

Official numbers on the march are 40,000. Why does the article refer to a million "visitors"? If not on the march, how are they supposed to be involved?

Streona (talk) 02:29, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2018 contents

What material regarding the 2018 event should be included? After some edit warring, I've reverted to a version before During the 2018 Pride London, a dozen of people carrying transphobic slogans took the lead of the demonstration without authorization. These people claimed that transgender activism contributes to lesbian erasure. They were quickly criticized by numerous LGBT+ organizations. The organizers of Pride London were criticized as well, for not having taken any measures to remove those trans-exclusionary activists from the march.^[1]^[2]^[3] was added. power~enwiki (π, ν) 18:01, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Hazel Southwell (7 July 2018). "Anti-trans group allowed to lead Pride in London march after hijack". PinkNews.com. Retrieved 7 July 2018.
^ Hazel Southwell (7 July 2018). "Pride in London cites 'hot weather' for anti-trans group being allowed to lead parade". PinkNews.com. Retrieved 7 July 2018.
^ Josh Gabbatiss (7 July 2018). "London Pride: Anti-trans activists disrupt parade by lying down in the street to protest 'lesbian erasure'". independent.co.uk. Retrieved 7 July 2018.

Good question. I think, an other good question could be "if it should be included, then how". I admit my phrasings might not be the most neutral in the world; even though I have strong anti-TERF convictions, there must be a way to describe what happened in a neutral, factual way, in the interest of the encyclopedia. KiwiNeko14 _(Meow) 07:33, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Power~enwiki: @ChiveFungi: As a user under an IP address made a short addition about the London Pride, I take the liberty to notify you, in order to know what to do next, and how to write about that event if we should (though I think we should). In other words, it's an invitation to talk :) KiwiNeko14 _(Meow) 12:19, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think the wording that power~enwiki reproduced above was good. Or at least a good start. Anybody who believes that wording is unfair to TERFs has had over a week to raise objections here but they have not so I'll go ahead and reinstate it. --ChiveFungi (talk) 18:14, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Johnson

On July 2, Uk55 removed the statement that The former Mayor of London, Boris Johnson has been a vocal supporter of Pride in London. with edit summary "Removed irrelevant info". Earlier today it was added back by 109.152.208.48 with the edit summary of "Undid revision 904547014 by Uk55 (talk) Sockpuppet of blocked user." I am re-removing the material because as a statement on the views and actions of a prominent politician it should not be present in the article without being supported by reliable, independent, secondary sources. Currently there is no source for the statement, and Johnson's views are not mentioned elsewhere in the body of the article. Secondly, I see no reason to believe the IP editor's statement about Uk55, who is a long-term, if recently mostly inactive, user. Accusations of sockpuppetry, if they are to be made, should be made at WP:SPI and not obliquely in edit summaries. Wham2001 (talk) 20:08, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Wham2001: Edits from sockpuppets can be reverted per WP:BMB. Uk55 is an obvious sock of Bhtpbank. You are, of course, perfectly entitled to reinstate the edit (and take responsibility for it). Revisiting the statement, I do concur with your reasoning. 109.152.208.48 (talk) 17:34, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's one of the challenges with this article. It reflects a long history of events organised by different people, in different places, supported or paid for by different people, under one banner. The Johnson bit had been chopped about over the years of edits and has only become relevant perhaps now he's PM. I don't think the endorsement or otherwise of any former Mayor is that important. --DavidTTTaylor (talk) 20:05, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

PiL Logo1.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:41, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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:

Pride XTP1.JPG

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:38, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Lesbian erasure protest controversy"

The subsection currently titled as this has previously flicked between this and "anti-transgender protest controversy." I think the "anti-transgender" wording is preferred, as it is clearly the focus of the source material. It calls the protesters first and foremost "anti-trans protesters" and most of the article is dedicated to discussing their relationship with transgender issues. The term "lesbian erasure" appears only in the headline, as an editorial shortcut for the aspects of lesbian discourse covered in the article. Awoma (talk) 08:27, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Hazel Southwell (7 July 2018). "Anti-trans group allowed to lead Pride in London march after hijack". PinkNews.com. Retrieved 7 July 2018.

[2] Hazel Southwell (7 July 2018). "Pride in London cites 'hot weather' for anti-trans group being allowed to lead parade". PinkNews.com. Retrieved 7 July 2018.

[3] Josh Gabbatiss (7 July 2018). "London Pride: Anti-trans activists disrupt parade by lying down in the street to protest 'lesbian erasure'". independent.co.uk. Retrieved 7 July 2018.

[1]

[2]

[3]