Talk:2020s anti-transgender movement in the United Kingdom

NPOV

This article has been created without any reference to an 1:1 article on the English Wikipedia and without the claim(s) on the lead section being reliably sourced. I apply NPOV when I am unhappy about senarios like this, especially if the subject may be controversial. To be clear Wikiquote welcome's reliable and notable and quotable quotes about all matters LGBT & LGBT+ and movements both for and against provided QLP hasn't been violated. My immediate concern here is the lead section is reliably sourced. Thankyou -- DeirgeDel ^t_a^c 19:39, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

@CarmenEsparzaAmoux:: Thankyou for adding sources to the lead section at Special:Diff/3313062. I remain of concern that you may have used W:WP:SYNTH and may have violated W:Wikipedia:No original research. I'd really prefer to be dealing with a theme that had a one-to-one matching article on the English Wikipedia or that there was a w:Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard on Wikiquote that could check this out. As such I'm going to request the NPOV remains in place until this is reviewed. I was just on a coffee break doing this and hope to return to this later. Thankyou for submitting the article. -- DeirgeDel ^t_a^c 20:01, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

@CarmenEsparzaAmoux:: I've announced my concerns at Wikiquote:Village pump#Transgender article lead section possible issue. Thankyou. DeirgeDel ^t_a^c 20:58, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

For my perspective, I think this is a reasonably-sourced and neutral claim and I think that it is reasonable to say that this is an existing phenomenon. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:10, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

@Koavf:: OK: so I identify as British, male and old enough to have used punch cards to input and run programs. Respect your views Justin but I remain concerned and the TERFs term immediately seems to be controversial. I have no real concern with the quotes in the article but I do remain concerned over the lead statement. I question if it can be read to disparage perhaps a significant majority of British women as TERFs. If I understand it right transgender carries a spectrum of cases and generally the real concern is a small proportion may be identifying as transgender to exploit others, possibly particularly vulnerable women. I'm not in the debate or having more than a cursory awareness of it. The use of conservative and political may also identify the Conservative Party (UK) which may be intended or may mislead. I also observe all the citations used for the references appear to be from American sources. This really needs a debate on the English Wikipedia where there is an W:en:NPOV noticeboard and resources to debate this. The article creator has created a sitelinked Wikidata item so at least I don't have to concern myself about that. If no-one else comes here to share my concerns in say 12 hours feel free to remove the {{NPOV}} tag; though if anyone removes it sooner with no objections to the lead section then I'm not going to dispute that. -- DeirgeDel ^t_a^c 22:43, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

I've removed the NPOV as I see no consensus for it remaining in place, certainly at the moment. I remain with personal concerns as stated previously; perhaps moreso as is seems TERF can be interpreted broadly construed, ambiguously, and with derogatory intent which makes a claim reliant upon it somewhat problematic. The use of a citebomb of American sources for a UK article does not strike me as a balanced approached, although it is certainly necessary to go beyond UK sources to get a balanced view of UK topics. I have suggested it for a topic at London Wikimedia Meetup Number 193 which I am most likely not going to be attending personally. -- DeirgeDel ^t_a^c 10:17, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Merge any notable/quotable quotes to Transgender or Transphobia

There is no Wikipedia article on this topic. There are only two actual quotable quotes in here. We should be wary of "theme" articles where the theme is to create a "wall of shame" of one-sided editorializing where search engines can easily find it. HouseOfChange (talk) 02:09, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Quite so, I support a merger. A formal "anti-transgender movement" doesn't really exist in the UK, despite what the deleted one-sided reliable sources tried to suggest. Debates in the British media concern conflicting rights involving potential or actual legislation, but there is no formal organisation identifying as "anti-transgender". The article title is a misnomer and a merger to "transgender" is to be preferred. Incidentally, those writers and journalists opposed to gender self-id reject the transphobic tag, since the recognised medical condition gender dysphoria is not something they reject. An article [title using the word] transphobia would itself be "one-sided editorializing". Philip Cross (talk) 12:32, 18 February 2024 (UTC) [previously "An article titled", Edit: Philip Cross (talk) 07:10, 19 February 2024 (UTC)]

We already have an article Transphobia, also one for Gender-critical feminism, and they are both already as big a mess as you might expect, walls of shame for unquotable POV-pushing "quotes." No reason for the UK to be singled out. HouseOfChange (talk) 01:09, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

LGBT rights opposition might be another merge target. I agree having this as a standalone page is dubious without a corresponding Wikipedia article to substantiate that it is in fact a notable topic. Ficaia (talk) 14:23, 20 February 2024 (UTC)