Talk:Same-sex unions in the United States

disambiguation

This article should not be a disambiguation, it should be an article that talks about the states, Defense of Marriage Act and many other factors.--Cooljuno411 (talk) 20:03, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great, why don't you start writing it then? Actually, all of those topics are well covered in the three links shown.Textorus (talk) 20:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. -Rrius (talk) 11:26, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You : ] --Cooljuno411 (talk) 11:24, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Arrangement

California and Oregon were listed with civil unions because they offer the same rights as civil unions, as opposed to other domestic partnership schemes. If everyone wants alphabetical order, that's fine, but previous order reflected the order in the main articles, which is chronological by introduction of the status in the jurisdiction. -Rrius (talk) 17:10, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Colorado

HRC:Human Rights Campaign Applauds Colorado for Enacting Legislation Making Legal Rights

Colorado: Designated Beneficiary Agreement Act 85.8.124.245 (talk) 08:38, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hawaii Legislature Passes Civil Unions

Template needs to be updated for Hawaii:
http://www.hrcbackstory.org/2010/04/congratulations-hawaii-legislature-passes-civil-unions/
Native94080 (talk) 07:41, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oregon and Washington

In states Oregon and Washington unions granting rights similar to marriage over the years. 92.252.57.93 (talk) 22:38, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed map change

Since this is an article about same-sex unions that are recognized in the United States, I propose we change the current map in favor of the one shown to the left. It more accurately suits the article as it highlights which states have marriage, civil unions/domestic partnerships, or no recognition. The current map shows bans and all, and those bans are not the focus of this page. Axelfar (talk) 04:32, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, people should be able to check the map for all laws relating to same-sex marriage, wheter legal or illegal. The article isn't titled Legal same-sex unions in the United States. CTF83! 10:17, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How about adding it under the civil union section or some other part of the article? That way there is a map that shows all the current laws and one that shows the recognition of same-sex unions. Axelfar (talk) 17:40, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To me one map is the easiest, most efficient way to show it. We'll see what others think. CTF83! 23:54, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think the blue/gray map conveys a more positive idea about same sex relationship recognition — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.113.211.228 (talk) 11:20, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Comment

There is currently a request for comment on what shade of blue should be used on File:Samesex marriage in USA.svg to represent full marriage equality. Fry1989 ^eh? 03:28, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Section on Oklahoma?

I'm aware the judge immediately stayed his own ruling as SCOTUS had done so in Utah, but is it still worth mentioning in the list of states? --occono (talk) 03:09, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading maps

The maps in the civil union and domestic partnership sections are misleading: they fail by color and description to clearly differentiate between state-level recognition and local-level (county or city) recognition. There's a big gap between the two: city or county domestic partnerships (by whatever name they are called) give couples very few enforceable legal rights, if any. For example, see this article about civil unions offered by the city of Bisbee, Arizona. So the maps as they stand are putting bad information out there, and should be corrected to prevent misunderstanding.

Remove State laws regarding same-sex partnerships in the United States

Could we remove the "State laws regarding same-sex partnerships in the United States" map? We have enough maps as it is. --Prcc27 (talk) 04:46, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Civil Unions Map

The map should be re-added because it shows all the states with cu/dps.

@Tinmanic: So are PNG maps not allowed on wikipedia or are they prohibited for cases like this? --Prcc27 (talk) 06:19, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, I don't think there is a rule that PNG maps aren't allowed on Wikipedia. [1] --Prcc27 (talk) 02:15, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Same-sex unions in the United States

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Same-sex unions in the United States's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Stein":

From Sonia Sotomayor: Stein, Sam (May 1, 2009). "Inside Obama's Court Deliberations: Sotomayor Most Mentioned". The Huffington Post. Retrieved May 2, 2009. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
From Same-sex marriage in Wisconsin: Stein, Jason (Jun 10, 2014). "U.S. Appeals Court signals gay marriage ruling may be weeks away". Wisconsin Journal Sentinel. Retrieved Jun 10, 2014.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 23:39, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Every state in the Sixth Circuit has a case before the court on August 6, 2014."

First of all, this is an extraordinary circumstance, if true. Secondly, I'd like a cite for every calendar or docket. Third, that's worth a DYK. Finally, we need every set of eyes to watch carefully this article on that date. Bearian (talk) 20:09, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Too many maps

Now that the civil unions and domestic partnership sections have shrunk due to more states having full marriage rights, their maps have started bleeding heavily into other sections. There are three consecutive maps showing nearly exactly the same thing, just with minor variations. Two of them are also wildly outdated. I propose removing one or two of them to reduce clutter. If not, they should at the very least be brought up to date. Axelfar (talk) 15:42, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]