The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

> Discussions in this subforum are hidden from search engines.

However, they are not hidden from automobile engines, including the newer, more "environmentally-friendly" electric and hybrid engines. Also, please note that this subforum is meant to be used for discussion of the actual biographical articles themselves; more generalized discussions of BLP policy should be posted in the General Discussion or Bureaucracy forums.

3 Pages V  1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Luke Evans - not as gay as previously believed
carbuncle
post Tue 9th August 2011, 3:38am
Post #1


Fat Cat
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,601
Joined: Sun 30th Mar 2008, 4:48pm
Member No.: 5,544



Luke Evans (actor) is currently fully protected due to a dispute about Evans' sexuality. There seems to be no question that Evans is openly gay, just about whether or not WP says he is gay. Although WP was happy to label Jay Brannan as gay for years despite his objections, this seems to be going to the other extreme as can be seen in this BLP noticeboard thread.

It has hit the blogs already here:This should be interesting...

This post has been edited by carbuncle: Tue 9th August 2011, 3:39am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
It's the blimp, Frank
post Tue 9th August 2011, 4:10am
Post #2


Über Member
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 734
Joined: Mon 27th Mar 2006, 3:54pm
Member No.: 82



Is Off2riorob an editor like Scott MacDonald who is policing Wikipedia for BLP violations, or is it more complicated than that?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Cla68
post Tue 9th August 2011, 5:15am
Post #3


Postmaster
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,763
Joined: Fri 18th Apr 2008, 5:53pm
Member No.: 5,761

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(It's the blimp, Frank @ Tue 9th August 2011, 4:10am) *

Is Off2riorob an editor like Scott MacDonald who is policing Wikipedia for BLP violations, or is it more complicated than that?


As far as I know, he's simply trying to help Scott MacDonald police the BLPs. It's dumbfounding how much resistance he and Scott get to their efforts. If WP's administration was serious about taking care of BLPs, it would give immediate blocks to any editor who revert wars with Scott or Off2 in a BLP.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Silver seren
post Tue 9th August 2011, 6:38am
Post #4


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu 30th Dec 2010, 2:09pm
Member No.: 36,940

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Cla68 @ Tue 9th August 2011, 5:15am) *

QUOTE(It's the blimp, Frank @ Tue 9th August 2011, 4:10am) *

Is Off2riorob an editor like Scott MacDonald who is policing Wikipedia for BLP violations, or is it more complicated than that?


As far as I know, he's simply trying to help Scott MacDonald police the BLPs. It's dumbfounding how much resistance he and Scott get to their efforts. If WP's administration was serious about taking care of BLPs, it would give immediate blocks to any editor who revert wars with Scott or Off2 in a BLP.


*laughs* No, they're trying to control BLPs. They've been doing that for the longest time. Any edit they make to a BLP, I immediately question what their motive was behind it.

The BLP policy is mainly so that rumors and other damaging info like that isn't included from sources that aren't very reliable. When a BLP subject openly admits to info such as sexuality (or race, ethnicity, ect.) in an interview, than that is information to include, especially when it seems like in this case the subject's sexuality is an important part of his acting career.

This post has been edited by Silver seren: Tue 9th August 2011, 6:58am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lilburne
post Tue 9th August 2011, 8:06am
Post #5


Chameleon
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 890
Joined: Thu 17th Jun 2010, 11:42am
Member No.: 21,803

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Silver seren @ Tue 9th August 2011, 7:38am) *



It is no one's business except for wiki-wankers what goes on behind closed doors in the privacy of one's bedroom.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Silver seren
post Tue 9th August 2011, 8:39am
Post #6


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu 30th Dec 2010, 2:09pm
Member No.: 36,940

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(lilburne @ Tue 9th August 2011, 8:06am) *

QUOTE(Silver seren @ Tue 9th August 2011, 7:38am) *



It is no one's business except for wiki-wankers what goes on behind closed doors in the privacy of one's bedroom.


Privacy would be true, if he hadn't openly admitted to it in an interview, thus purposefully giving up his privacy. And considering the interview he gave about his collection of gay porn, it's obviously something that doesn't bother him all that much for people to know about. There's a difference between secret pictures or rumors being discussed in tabloid magazines and this situation. The subject has been specifically open about it, so the issue of privacy is neither here nor there.

This is likely all a big PR thing so as to save his "reputation", which is a bit insulting in and of itself.

This post has been edited by Silver seren: Tue 9th August 2011, 8:40am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jagärdu
post Tue 9th August 2011, 11:27am
Post #7


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri 25th Jun 2010, 3:20am
Member No.: 22,114



QUOTE(Silver seren @ Tue 9th August 2011, 8:39am) *

QUOTE(lilburne @ Tue 9th August 2011, 8:06am) *

QUOTE(Silver seren @ Tue 9th August 2011, 7:38am) *



It is no one's business except for wiki-wankers what goes on behind closed doors in the privacy of one's bedroom.


Privacy would be true, if he hadn't openly admitted to it in an interview, thus purposefully giving up his privacy. And considering the interview he gave about his collection of gay porn, it's obviously something that doesn't bother him all that much for people to know about. There's a difference between secret pictures or rumors being discussed in tabloid magazines and this situation. The subject has been specifically open about it, so the issue of privacy is neither here nor there.

This is likely all a big PR thing so as to save his "reputation", which is a bit insulting in and of itself.

Insulting? Only if what you assume is correct, and you have no basis for such an assumption. What if he pretended to be gay 10 years ago as opposed to pretending not to be gay now? What if he was always bisexual, but claimed to be gay 10 years ago because it was easier? I agree that the more probable explanation is that for some reason his publicists have told him not to play up the gay angle (not to refute it, but also not to be open about it) for some reason. Maybe it is still harder to get certain roles if you are openly gay? But that's just what *seems* most likely to me. The ambiguity that he has cast upon his sexuality now, quite on purpose, makes it difficult for anyone to say emphatically that he is gay or straight, or bi. The reactions you see at the BLP/N seem pretty standard to me in such a situation. BLP is designed to be conservative and cautious about these types of things.

It is also notable here that those who are opposing Off2riorob and Andythegrump are quite clearly pushing an agenda, and have little to no concern about the issue in terms of any one's privacy. They just want more gay rolemodels in the world. Period. When this becomes clear people like Andy and Rob are going to be even more firm in their approach. That's the nature of the game.

This post has been edited by Jagärdu: Tue 9th August 2011, 11:31am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lilburne
post Tue 9th August 2011, 11:53am
Post #8


Chameleon
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 890
Joined: Thu 17th Jun 2010, 11:42am
Member No.: 21,803

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Silver seren @ Tue 9th August 2011, 9:39am) *

QUOTE(lilburne @ Tue 9th August 2011, 8:06am) *

QUOTE(Silver seren @ Tue 9th August 2011, 7:38am) *



It is no one's business except for wiki-wankers what goes on behind closed doors in the privacy of one's bedroom.


Privacy would be true, if he hadn't openly admitted to it in an interview, thus purposefully giving up his privacy. And considering the interview he gave about his collection of gay porn, it's obviously something that doesn't bother him all that much for people to know about. There's a difference between secret pictures or rumors being discussed in tabloid magazines and this situation. The subject has been specifically open about it, so the issue of privacy is neither here nor there.

This is likely all a big PR thing so as to save his "reputation", which is a bit insulting in and of itself.



Maybe he took the Bachmann cure.


Whether he is gay, bi, straight, or whatever, ya'll should stop with the stoopid labelling. Its not big, and its not clever, it just makes you look like some fuckwit.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jagärdu
post Tue 9th August 2011, 1:05pm
Post #9


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri 25th Jun 2010, 3:20am
Member No.: 22,114



Now Silver is calling Gawker "the news", and claiming some sort of smug satisfaction of the fact that this top notch "news" outlet is poking fun at Wikipedia for being "idiotically bureaucratic". How old are you Silver? Gawker is an online tabloid, not "the news." The news couldn't care less if this guy was gay, straight, bi or into furry fandom. This fight is now spilling over onto one of Wikipedia's bigger problems, which is the slow process of turning a reference source into a collection of completely meaningless trivia by gossip hounds, fans and hobbyists. The problem with crowd sourcing is that the crowds are often interested in complete crap.

This post has been edited by Jagärdu: Tue 9th August 2011, 1:06pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Silver seren
post Tue 9th August 2011, 8:12pm
Post #10


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu 30th Dec 2010, 2:09pm
Member No.: 36,940

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



The "labeling" would be improper if it was just speculation or if he had never stated anything about it. However, it's not based on any rumors, he outright discussed it fully in multiple interviews. Thus, his statement should be included. And to remain neutral, you should also include the current info that he is dating Holly.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jagärdu
post Tue 9th August 2011, 8:23pm
Post #11


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri 25th Jun 2010, 3:20am
Member No.: 22,114



QUOTE(Silver seren @ Tue 9th August 2011, 8:12pm) *

The "labeling" would be improper if it was just speculation or if he had never stated anything about it. However, it's not based on any rumors, he outright discussed it fully in multiple interviews. Thus, his statement should be included. And to remain neutral, you should also include the current info that he is dating Holly.

Once again, what if he were bi 10 years ago, and found it safer simply to say that he was gay? What if he were bi or even straight and he found it advantageous to say that he was gay because at the time he was doing musicals (and not action films)? You assume that he is gay and now hiding that fact for professional reasons, yet that assumption has no more evidence to back it than any number of others (e.g. the two I made above). What this comes down to is gay politics, pure and simple. He said he was gay and he's a role model so gosh darn it we're not gonna let him get away with trying to be anything else!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EricBarbour
post Tue 9th August 2011, 8:25pm
Post #12


blah
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined: Mon 25th Feb 2008, 2:31am
Member No.: 5,066

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Milton Roe
post Tue 9th August 2011, 8:29pm
Post #13


Known alias of J. Random Troll
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined: Thu 28th Feb 2008, 1:03am
Member No.: 5,156

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Tue 9th August 2011, 1:25pm) *

Image

This is too thick for a pie chart. I would call it a cheese or cake chart.

Mmmmmm. Caaake. unsure.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lilburne
post Tue 9th August 2011, 8:56pm
Post #14


Chameleon
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 890
Joined: Thu 17th Jun 2010, 11:42am
Member No.: 21,803

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Silver seren @ Tue 9th August 2011, 9:12pm) *

The "labeling" would be improper if it was just speculation or if he had never stated anything about it. However, it's not based on any rumors, he outright discussed it fully in multiple interviews. Thus, his statement should be included. And to remain neutral, you should also include the current info that he is dating Holly.



Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
A Horse With No Name
post Tue 9th August 2011, 8:57pm
Post #15


I have as much free time as a Wikipedia admin!
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,471
Joined: Mon 26th Jan 2009, 1:54pm
Member No.: 9,985



QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Tue 9th August 2011, 4:29pm) *
This is too thick for a pie chart. I would call it a cheese or cake chart.

Mmmmmm. Caaake. unsure.gif


Mmmmmmmmmm...cheesecake! evilgrin.gif evilgrin.gif evilgrin.gif

Image

I bet The Adversary looks like this. smile.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Silver seren
post Tue 9th August 2011, 8:58pm
Post #16


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu 30th Dec 2010, 2:09pm
Member No.: 36,940

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Jagärdu @ Tue 9th August 2011, 8:23pm) *

QUOTE(Silver seren @ Tue 9th August 2011, 8:12pm) *

The "labeling" would be improper if it was just speculation or if he had never stated anything about it. However, it's not based on any rumors, he outright discussed it fully in multiple interviews. Thus, his statement should be included. And to remain neutral, you should also include the current info that he is dating Holly.

Once again, what if he were bi 10 years ago, and found it safer simply to say that he was gay? What if he were bi or even straight and he found it advantageous to say that he was gay because at the time he was doing musicals (and not action films)? You assume that he is gay and now hiding that fact for professional reasons, yet that assumption has no more evidence to back it than any number of others (e.g. the two I made above). What this comes down to is gay politics, pure and simple. He said he was gay and he's a role model so gosh darn it we're not gonna let him get away with trying to be anything else!


If he makes a new statement himself about being bi instead, then it will super-cede the prior statement and the old interviews and how it affected his career can then be discussed while saying he is bi. (If he speaks about it and says he's straight, I have no idea how to rectify the two things. Maybe invoke extreme bi-curiousness in his younger years?)

It has nothing to do with being a "gay role model", so you can stop repeating yourself. I don't think any of us want more "role models" like Ellen or Rosie. *shudders*
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Milton Roe
post Tue 9th August 2011, 9:04pm
Post #17


Known alias of J. Random Troll
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined: Thu 28th Feb 2008, 1:03am
Member No.: 5,156

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Tue 9th August 2011, 1:57pm) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Tue 9th August 2011, 4:29pm) *
This is too thick for a pie chart. I would call it a cheese or cake chart.

Mmmmmm. Caaake. unsure.gif


Mmmmmmmmmm...cheesecake! evilgrin.gif evilgrin.gif evilgrin.gif

Image

I bet The Adversary looks like this. smile.gif

Like Ursula Undress?

Not unless he speaks French and has to be dubbed in English. Bond seems to talk to so many dubbed people in those early films. Or they only say AHHHHAAA in a sort of cleft palate-y way, like Oddjob.

Well, she's easier on the eyes than Gert Fröbe. Not so sure about The Adversary.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Somey
post Wed 10th August 2011, 4:59am
Post #18


Can't actually moderate (or even post)
*********

Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,815
Joined: Sat 17th Jun 2006, 7:47pm
From: Dreamland
Member No.: 275



It's an interesting problem, I suppose - normally it wouldn't be anyone's business, but since he's a movie actor playing leading-man roles, sexual orientation is (for better or worse) an important factor in determining "bankability." And presumably readers will want to know... In an ideal world, the subject could get things like that nixed from web-based biographical content on request, but I doubt anyone else is going to let him do it (i.e., other websites and media outlets).

Like Mr. Seren says, he did once claim to be gay in an interview, so even though it would be better to leave that out of the article, it's hard to justify making an exception for him if they're going to treat other gay (or whatever) celebrities the same way.

Naturally, if WP allowed people to opt out completely and have their articles deleted, I'd support allowing him to do that, no question - but it doesn't sound like that's what he wants either.

Looking at the big picture, I guess gay folks won't have complete equality until people either stop making a point of drawing attention to their sexual orientation, or until people start making a point of drawing attention to the sexual orientation of heterosexuals. Wikipedia isn't set up for either of those eventualities (and to be fair, the latter approach would be rather silly), so in that respect I'd have to say they're simply prolonging the problem every time one of these incidents occurs.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EricBarbour
post Wed 10th August 2011, 5:51am
Post #19


blah
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined: Mon 25th Feb 2008, 2:31am
Member No.: 5,066

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Somey @ Tue 9th August 2011, 9:59pm) *
Looking at the big picture, I guess gay folks won't have complete equality until people either stop making a point of drawing attention to their sexual orientation, or until people start making a point of drawing attention to the sexual orientation of heterosexuals. Wikipedia isn't set up for either of those eventualities (and to be fair, the latter approach would be rather silly), so in that respect I'd have to say they're simply prolonging the problem every time one of these incidents occurs.

More to the point: why in the hell is it so important to tag every applicable bio on WP with "gay"?
Oh, right, of course, there's a gang of LGBT warriors on it, screaming for attention. Even the Zionists
aren't that loud.

12,583 articles. Goodness me.
And "only" 2/3 of them are stubs and start-class. rolleyes.gif
Look at the members list and scroll down to #216.
It's Tyciol! Yeah, great idea, letting him hang around!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
radek
post Wed 10th August 2011, 5:55am
Post #20


Über Member
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 699
Joined: Sat 28th Nov 2009, 10:40pm
Member No.: 15,651

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Tue 9th August 2011, 3:25pm) *

Image


Based on something or a joke I'm not getting? (I ask because I'm surprised)

This post has been edited by radek: Wed 10th August 2011, 6:03am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 26th 7 17, 6:44pm