Talk:White Party (LGBT)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the White Party (LGBT) redirect.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

The Move

The LGBT Circuit Party, The White Party, can now be found at the aptly name The White Party. It has been pointed out that "The White Party" is a particular circuit party, and "White Parties" are a type of party that have no affiliation with the LGBT community, so this has now been rectified. ReetnuloV (talk) 01:16, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Initial Creation

There wasn't anything on the white party on Wikipedia, not that I could find, so I felt I should put atleast something up. Please contribute! --Augur 06:11, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cocaine

This is a generic term I've heard used many times for cocaine centric parties of diverse participant and venue. Am I ~~free~~ off base? Please try not take offense if so inclined, I've seen my share of attack as an outspoken participant in rave culture over the years. ∴ here…♠ 09:32, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard the same thing regarding cocaine. Also, I'm removing "but black people still think its racism" because he most definitely did NOT say that.

Florida or Palm Springs?

This is very confusing. The White Party that I am familiar with (I have not gone, but friends have) is in Palm Springs, California in April. This is a huge event that has been going for more than 15 years, and is the one mentioned in the Circuit party article. Some media coverage includes [1]. I think the article should be rewritten to give it at least equal, if not greater, prominence. MCB 17:01, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just finished watching the documentary "When Boys Fly" It's definitely the Miami White Party (not Palm Springs). There's no beach in Palm Springs.--Socal951 (talk) 07:18, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you're correct and IMDB is wrong! I've fixed the article and added some confirming sources ([2] and the film's credits [3]). Thanks for posting this. --MCB (talk) 07:46, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup

I've done some cleanup, attempting to show that the article is about more than one party. The article cites absolutely no sources. Otto4711 (talk) 23:05, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Otto. There were in fact sources, but they were removed by an anon IP editor. I have restored them. You might want to take a look at the section below; there have been some disruptive edits since your contributions and I'll like to keep the article on track. Best, MCB (talk) 21:00, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lead paragraph, LGBT portal, and disruptive edits

This article has been the subject of several disruptive edits by anon IPs (possibly sockpuppets, not clear; both have edited the same set of articles, including Posh, Chic (style), and this one, in very similar manners and with identical edit summaries). This has included:

Removal of sources and footnotes (this series of edits over a short period removed a number of citations).

Elimination of the lead paragraph which introduces the article. This article is about all the White Parties in various cities in North America, not just the Miami party. The anon edits have changed the lead to list only the Miami party.

Removal of the {{LGBT sidebar}} infobox, with the edit summary "stop turning this into a gay pride article". In Category:LGBT events in the United States, many or most of the articles contain either the {{LGBT sidebar}} infobox or the {{portal}} template, which is appropriate for LGBT culture events. The user appears to be unclear about the difference beween categories and infoboxes/portals.

Misleading edit summaries including "Grammer [sic] Corrections" for a major rewrite (here).

None of these edits have been discussed here on the Talk page. Before resorting to dispute resolution or administrative action, I'd like to see a discussion here. --MCB (talk) 20:57, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT, Really?

Are "white parties" really LGBT parties? I find that hard to believe since rappers like Diddy and 50 Cent have been involved with them...

Is it possible that "White Parties" are just a type of party, that the LGBT community happens to like?66.253.190.204 (talk) 04:13, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Palm Springs and Florida parties are explicitly and unquestionably LGBT events, and existed well before P.Diddy, 50 Cent, or any other non-gay celebs were involved. It looks like rappers and others have adopted the concept in recent years, though I don't know if their "white parties" are in any way similar. --MCB (talk) 07:02, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I think a section should be created elaborating on what you stated.66.253.190.204 (talk) 18:13, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually it would be better to present sources showing hw these mainstream rappaers are involved and work that in. There's little doubt these are LGBT events and sources pretty clearly show this so showing how the rappers are involved would be interesting. -- Banjeboi 05:24, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a link to Rapper Diddy's White Party press coverage: http://www.tmz.com/2007/09/04/p-diddys-white-party-people/. Listen, since Rappers and other very non (possibly anti) LGBT people seem to be the largest proponents of "White parties" in recent times, I think the article needs a drastic overhaul mentioning this. It's not like People Magazine or TMZ are my bibles, but it's commonly known in our culture that these parties are associated with wealthy rappers, celebrities and socialites that aren't LGBT or even associated with the LGBT community. Given the article makes no mention of that fact indicates a glaring omission. IT NEEDS TO BE REVISED. I called for a revision over 3 months ago and no one has made any effort to do so. The opening sentence is only partially accurate saying "The White Party is the name of a number of circuit parties held annually, catering to the LGBT communities." Since the link provided shows that there are HUGE, nationally publicized non-LGBT White parties, it proves that the current opening statement would be like claiming that humans are the only mammals 66.253.191.171 (talk) 08:26, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It might be desirable to add a line stating that a "white party" may refer to any party in which all white attire is the norm, but I think you're missing the point of this article. It is intended to describe The White Party, not white parties in general. The White Party is an event (actually a collection of similar events held in different locations around the same time) that is specifically LGBT and has a specific history, as outlined in the article. If you really find it necessary to describe Diddy's white parties, perhaps you should propose a new article describing white parties and see if anyone thinks that they are a large enough phenomenon to merit one. 67.116.126.226 (talk) 08:20, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take your word that this article is about "The White Party," it is therefore mislabeled. I will reenter it under "The White Party" and remove it for "White Party." It seems that will be more accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.253.191.171 (talk) 00:54, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is no consensus for this page move, and it has been reverted twice by two different editors. Please do not attempt it again. In addition, pages should not be moved by the cut-and-paste method, and Wikipedia articles do begin with the definite article "The" except in certain circumstances. (See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (definite and indefinite articles at beginning of name) for explanation and exceptions.) --MCB (talk) 09:01, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Two different editors counting yourself... The article is currently mislabeled since there is undeniably a difference between "The White Party" and "white parties." This is evidenced by the fact that "The White Party" is a LGBT circuit party and "white parties" are just a type of party where guests dress in white. Who is disputing this? That is common knowledge (that is sourced on this page), and I was revising the article to reflect that and avoid confusion...

Put it to a vote. A decision will be made by 20-Nov.-08 12:00amESTReetnuloV (talk) 15:01, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vote: APPROVE the fixReetnuloV (talk) 21:57, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Page moves

Please stop moving this page without consensus. You can't just demand a vote (we do poll editors for recommendations, but we don't vote), name an arbitrary deadline, and move the page, replacing it with a non-useful and unencylopedic one-line article, then moving it again (via a cut-and-paste move, which you have been warned about previously) to yet another name which is neither a useful index term nor commonly used name (see WP:TITLE). Unfortunately, the one-line article that you substituted for the article (parties where people simply dress in white) is not a particularly encyclopedic concept, and if it were proposed or nominated for deletion, it would probably be deleted.

You registered an account on November 13 and your first edit was a cut-and-paste page move of this page, and most of your edits since then have been repeats or variations on that, or attempts to fix the problems caused by your page moves. Please read Help:Moving a page as well as Wikipedia:Naming conventions. I have move-protected the page for now to avoid further problems and will try to get some other editors involved in the discussion. --MCB (talk) 08:48, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree the page moving seems unhelpful. I would also support rolling back deletion to Feb 2008 if they haven't been restored. -- Banjeboi 10:15, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on White Party. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091009204927/http://www.suneeplaza.info:80/cgi-bin/page.pl?p=white to http://www.suneeplaza.info/cgi-bin/page.pl?p=white

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} 01:55, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]