Luke Evans - not as gay as previously believed Options

[carbuncle]

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:

• Hollywood’s Next Big Action Star Is Gay
• Is Luke Evans Gay? Publicist Tries to Get His Story Straight
• Action Star Luke Evans Doesn’t Realize His Gay Past Is All Over The Internets

This should be interesting...

This post has been edited by carbuncle:

[Somey]

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.

[EricBarbour]

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. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif)
Look at the members list and scroll down to #216.
It's Tyciol! Yeah, great idea, letting him hang around!