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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality 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.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anatomy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anatomy 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.AnatomyWikipedia:WikiProject AnatomyTemplate:WikiProject AnatomyAnatomy articles
This article was created or improved during Wiki Loves Pride, 2024.Wiki Loves PrideWikipedia:Wiki Loves PrideTemplate:Wiki Loves Pride talkWiki Loves Pride articles
Is the lack of consistency on purpose? I would think you'd favor mdy dates since American English is preferred. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 15:20, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Valjean I added the EngAm template as that was the style that was already in use, however, if this is not the proper use here, please feel free to remove! Juwan (talk) 18:44, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm more inclined to let Tamzin decide. I have no preference, just that consistency is usually how we roll here. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 20:36, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh crap! I didn't see this comment before making the edit. I'll self-revert, but I don't know if the MOS allows mixing European with American in this way. It could create confusion. Ultimately, it's your decision best made now, not later. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 21:28, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding of MOS:DATETIES is that it (wrongly, IMO, but that's a separate matter) requires MDY on (most) articles about the U.S., but does not require it on articles that only use AmEng as a matter of editorial preference. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 22:45, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Generalissima, Raladic, Tamzin, and JnpoJuwan (all major contributors to the article or ppl who changed the assessment): since this has gone back and forth a few times, I believe this page, with 900 words of readable prose, transcends "list with a lot of context" to "article with embedded lists", but I'd like to hear other's thoughts. Thanks, Queen of Heartstalk00:59, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tamzin and I listed it as list class because we intend to nominate it at FLC - the primary purpose of the article, after all, is to give a list of terms and give context for it. Other lists are majority prose; look at Heroic Age of Antarctic Exploration or Moons of Uranus which has roughly 100 words of prose per item on the list. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 02:02, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, I don't feel too strongly about it, so your explanation makes sense.
At first glance it just looked more like an article with an embedded list like Rainbow crosswalk (which arguably, I actually had split the list out into a standalone article, but after a merge discussion, it was merged into the article). Raladic (talk) 02:09, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In most cases the distinction between list-y article and article-y list is semantic. The only scenario where it really matters is this one, the "FLC or GAN/FAC?" question. And, like Generalissima, I was drawn toward the former; the main reason is that I found, in writing it, that most of the sources are more about the superficial aspect of "here's what people say" than the deeper question of "here's why people say it". Zimman 2014 and Edelman & Zimman 2014 do get into that somewhat, and this does raise the interesting question of what would happen in the future if more sources in that vein get published. But if that does happen, I think we can cross that bridge if we come to it. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 04:47, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's worth noting both of these examples were promoted over 15 years ago and have ballooned quite a bit from promotion. Since I was curious, I checked the RPS of all FLs listed in July:
.svg){kind=small}
.PNG)
