For your tireless, painstaking development and maintenance of Wikipedia's coverage of LGBT legal rights across hundreds of jurisdictions. I am continually impressed and inspired by your dedication and effort. Thank you! --j⚛e deckertalk 20:59, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
== Germany allows same sex marriage
LGBT Jordan Flag Removal
Should I be concerned that you've removed the jordanian lgbt flag from the page?
Edit summaries
Hi, please use edit summaries. It helps others to understand the intention of your edit and you can even avoid accidentally leaving edit summaries blank, see Help:Edit summary. Regards Hekerui (talk) 15:53, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
04 EU page
You realise you can't talk to a bot? It is automatic. I've left messages on the bot's owners talk pages. They'll make the changes to get it to stop making the edit.- J.Logan`t: 23:36, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I didn't see, user:Trehill checked that, I overrode and all seems good now. --Sisyph (talk) 05:46, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
I'm not arguing the importance, I'm arguing the relevance.
24.207.61.64 (talk) 02:17, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
I fail to see which right. I cannot find a single constitution guaranteeing the right to make Youtube videos. 24.207.61.64 (talk) 19:12, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
2010 in LGBT rights
Just through to let you know that you are currently involved in re-adding a blocked user's addition that is against the grain of consensus on talk.Lihaas (talk) 08:43, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
Firstly, there is way to say something and not WP:NPA. My response was a very courteous note. Secondly, your edit summaried were non-existant and against mention of both the other editors. per WP:BRD that addition needs consensus to come back in. Something the banned user did not do.Lihaas (talk) 17:11, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, why can't the YouTube video be there alongside the newspaper article, since the article is the primary source anyway? -- 94.101.2.145 (talk) 20:46, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Election updates
Hi, I don't think you need to update election numbers of ongoing elections every time the California Secretary of State updates the website. The results will be final on November 30 and the outcome is decided, so why not wait? Hekerui (talk) 00:10, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
RoughTranslation tag
Thanks for adding it. I'm, er, not sure how I missed it. Roscelese (talk) 18:08, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Illinois Civil unions?
How is the article up to date when the Illinois legislature legalized civil unions and it does not mention a word of that? (Tigerghost (talk) 05:59, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
I appreciate your efforts of contributing articles in Wikipedia, especially of current issues. No offense, You have not summarized your edits . Curiously, why would you remove the tags? The timeline sections should be reformatted into paragraphs, and you may not be familiar with proseline, which is the format used in Timeline. --Gh87 (talk) 19:37, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
Stop putting external links in edit summaries
Hi, I saw your edits on Template:Same-sex unions. Edit summaries are for explanations of changes you make, not for urls. If you want to explain an edit with a link, do it on the talk page. Don't cite external links that people have to visit but don't want to visit or that don't last (like Google News links, they are down quickly). No one can divine what you mean with an url, explain what you did instead, per WP:EDSUM. Thanks. Hekerui (talk) 20:39, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Slovenia
I just wanted to ask you whether you are sure that Slovenia will expand registered partnerships instead of legalizing same-sex marriage! I came across several sites that state that the government will approve SSM, like this one http://www.24kul.si/?id=798&fmod=0Olliyeah (talk) 07:06, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Oregon and Washington
Now in 2011, both states have more and more progress and unions in these states ar similiar to marriages. 188.118.183.248 (talk) 03:17, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
Unions in both states granting rights similar to marriage and there were only at the beginning a legislation granting limited/enumerated rights. 188.118.183.248 (talk) 03:21, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
Template:Same-sex unions
Hi, if you have problems with the last section, please start a discussion on the template talk page.
Where is the agreement that "Only jurisdictions which does not recognizes same-sex unions should be in this section"? Hekerui (talk) 23:06, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Evidence
What evidence do you have that Australia, Brazil & Chile are unlikely? At least provide evidence on Australia & Brazil, since Chile is going for civil unions now, apparently. --Smart (talk) 00:20, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
LGBT rights in Utah WP: Infobox references
Thanks Ron 1987. Your edits to LGBT rights in Utah encouraged me to review how similar pages for other states distinguish the lack of certain state protections when other protections exist within state entities like universities and political subdivisions like counties, cities and districts. Several pages include references in the main body of the article, and shorter references in the WP: Infobox. I published similar short references for the Utah Infobox which explain that the state isn't completely void of protections. The references are proved by the main body of the article. In Utah, as in many states, such protections are currently creations of state entities and political subdivisions, not the state itself. Thanks again for helping make the difference clear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.23.47.179 (talk) 02:25, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
Same-sex marriage in Oregon
You reverted a good faith edit to Same-sex marriage in Oregon, but you did not explain why. I reverted your revert because, superficially at least, the edit appears to be an improvement. —EncMstr (talk) 05:42, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
New Hampshire Questions
New Hampshire is trying to Repeal there Same-Sex Marriage Law. Where would that go on Same-sex marriage legislation in the United States? Would it be under 2.2?
I don't know where it would go or not. It looks like they are trying to take all the marriages from now on and change them to civil unions. However everyone who was married is still considered married in the state. It would be just future marriages.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Neither map would be compatible with this one, as it doesn't reflect constitutional bans on same-sex marriage. Ignis Fatuus (talk) 21:48, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
Re:Housing discrimination
Thanks for the heads-up. I can't believe I missed Delaware, especially since the HRC has a page about Delaware's non-discrimination laws but doesn't reflect that on its map. I went ahead and fixed my map and emailed the HRC about its mistake. Xnux 20:23, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for for your help with this article. When I created it, I had simply done a copy and paste of the guy who wanted a new article's comments on the template talk page. Since most of the sources aren't in English, I found it a bit of a challenge. So again, thank you and go hog wild if you want.:-) Me-123567-Me (talk) 16:09, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
I'm getting really frustrated with your lack of communication. I removed them because they are cited. I can move the citations if necessary. They're all at the end of the paragraph right now. Me-123567-Me (talk) 19:37, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
AfD for Chronology_of_diplomatic_recognitions_and_relations_of_South_Sudan
You participated in a related discussion before. The current one is here. Japinderum (talk) 11:36, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
This RFC is related to the recent AfD you participated at. Japinderum (talk) 08:19, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Seeking consensus on when to edit File:Samesex marriage in USA.svg following new legislation/court-rulings
Hello, I have noticed you made edits on File talk:Samesex marriage in USA.svg and/or File talk:Samesex marriage in USA.svg/Archive 5, so I am contacting you to take part in a newly-formed discussion at File talk:Samesex marriage in USA.svg as for whether we should update the map directly when a new legislation or court-order hits the books or if we should wait until said action takes effect.
Historically, we have been updating the map when the new legislation is signed (or veto overrode or won at the ballot box, etc.), and thus it can be inferred that the consensus is to update as soon as one of those occurs. A discussion has emerged in regards to whether we should begin updating from the effective date instead of from the date of signing/etc. If you have an opinion over this matter please post it at File_talk:Samesex_marriage_in_USA.svg#When_to_update_map.3F_Effective_date_or_signing.2Fruling_date
Excuse me, same-sex marriage is legal in Brazil (although it can't be performed directly) the country's Supreme Court ruled that two women can be legally married, and I even included a reference . Even the article on Same-sex marriage in Brazil states it "In Brazil, a same-sex couple may convert their civil union into marriage with the approval of a state judge, if approved that marriage is recognized in all the national territory". --DrkFrdric (talk) 18:54, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, but the ruling states that two people of the same sex can be legally married in Brazil, maybe it wasnt the Supreme Court, but as long as the Supreme Court doesnt strike the decision down, it stands. Now, you are right, not every single judge is going to perform these marriages, but a same-sex marriage is not illegal in Brazil, that was the essence of the ruling. So, same-sex marriage is legal in Brazil, even if not a single couple is allowed to marry, the court ruling was clear: Brazilian laws permit same-sex marriage. But obvioulsy, its not like Argentina where marriages are freely performed, that's why I put a "conditional" next to it. Only one same-sex marriage being declared legal is enough to show that a country's laws dont forbid marriage between two persons of the same-sex and as I write there are probably nearly a hundred valid same-sex marriages in Brazil. --DrkFrdric (talk) 19:26, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
With all due respect, the ruling does not give them permission to get married. The point was "is the marriage of two persons of the same-sex legal under Brazilian law?" and the court said yes. --DrkFrdric (talk) 20:02, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, that's clear, but that's not the point. The question is: "is same-sex marriage legal in X country?". In Brazil, it is, as the court ruled; even if there still isn't a way for every couple to get that right easily. --DrkFrdric (talk) 20:24, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
Certainly, same-sex couples can get married in Brazil as easily as straight couples (although they all can, because there a lot of judges giving marriage licenses in almost every Brazilian state), but this turns Barzil into a "special case", because same-sex marriage is legal, but there still isn't a bill that regulates how same-sex couples can get married, that's why couples have to go with judges, but then as I sais, same-sex marriage is legal. So we should at least add a note to make people know of the situation in the country, because it certainly is not illegal. I think the "(conditional)" illustrates this, but we could also asdd a note, as I said. --DrkFrdric (talk) 20:42, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
2012 in LGBT rihts
Just say this, not sure if it should be reverted as a notabke person. Any idea?Lihaas (talk) 06:31, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Map
Huh? What is "disgusting and unacceptable"? You might want to join in the discussion on the map; I have no idea what you're objecting to. — kwami (talk) 21:04, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
The colors are from Colorbrewer, which accommodates RG color blindness. Also, one of the problems with the current scheme is that it suggests that state-recognized marriage (light blue) is less legal recognition than no recognition of marriage (medium blue), which is backwards.
The distinction between 'most' (married in all but name) and 'some' (distinctly less than the rights of married) is not ours, but taken from the ILGA.
Hi there, once the ballots are officially certified this month and will definatly be on the november ballot can they be added to the timeline page Guyb123321 (talk) 09:39, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi! i am a spanish boy, i have lived in poland for a year.:) are you polish? --BernardaAlba (talk) 09:29, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
Thay´s cool. And you participate in any assotation or movement about LGBT rights appart of "cyber activism"? --BernardaAlba (talk) 10:03, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
What the hell happened to WP:COMMONNAME? How the hell is "Question 1" more accessible for readers (who, especially as time marches on) are unlikely have a clue one what the ballot position of the question was? How is it absurd to reverse a move that was made without consensus as admitted on the talk page by the proposer? Aside from a visceral love of irrelevancies like "official" names, do you have any reason for your reversion? Having an article called Proposition 8 or Proposition 187 is reasonable because that is, in popular culture, what those are known as, but "Question 1" has no such currency. -Rrius (talk) 16:23, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for adding template:LGBT in Washington State to appropriate articles. Navigational templates like this do a lot to help readers find information they need and it makes a big difference. Blue Rasberry (talk) 20:29, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
The Working Man's Barnstar
For updating vote totals and checking many edits for correctness. Hekerui (talk) 10:06, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Oaxaca
He Ron, I reverted your revert based on my reading of the source. Feel free to re-revert however if I am missing something (data from those South American states is... complicated)... L.tak (talk) 23:34, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
same sex marriage map
He Ron, saw your revert of the South America map, but am unfortunately not capable of doing it myself (as the map does not have those handy svg-labels per state that are available in us etc...). How can we get that updated; are you capable of doing that? I am not very happy with an incorrect map, although I understand that it is good to keep consistency between the different same sex maps; so this situation can not stay there for weeks I'd say... L.tak (talk) 10:28, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi
I'm in the process of completing my edits to Maryland Question 6. The template I added is not the same as the one in the results section. My preference would be to have Washington, Maine, and Maryland look the same. If you prefer not having both on the page, I will re-write the results section. Please don't remove the template. I spent time making it. Thank you. Teammmtalk email 05:25, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
New Mexico Marriage Bill
Hey Ron, I know you update Same-sex marriage legislation in the United States a majority of the time. A House member in the state is proposing a consitutional amendment to legalize marriage equality in the state of New Mexico. Where would that go on that page. Like what section would it go in?
http://www.nmlegis.gov/lcs/_session.aspx?chamber=H&legtype=JR&legno=3&year=13— Preceding unsigned comment added by Samesexmarriage101 (talk • contribs) 20:45, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill - Tellers
Hi Ron,
The UK Parliamentary system is a little antiquated and anachronistic so I entirely understand why people from other countries often make mistakes when describing how it works. There are some guides produced by Parliament on votes and the roles of tellers here:
[]
[]
[]
Although tellers do count the votes - and always support the votes they are counting - they do not technically vote themselves and so are in a slightly different position to all of the rest of the MPs who voted a certain way. As such, it's always useful to make this clear and the Parliamentary guidance in the third link notes that "...reports on some websites will, for instance, report “189 + 2 tell” as having voted in a certain way".
I hope this helps:) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chid12 (talk • contribs) 10:24, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Finland Marriage
It was killed by committee but there will be a citizens initiative to force parliament to vote on the bill. --Smart (talk) 12:20, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
Re: Argentina
Do you have any sources which are in English? And what way do you think this can be presented in the lead, as it most certainly is a notable fact? --Scientiom (talk) 14:54, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
LGBT at North Korea
“그리고 북한에서도 동성애자에 대해서는“세기말적인 부르주아적 타락”으로 몰아세우고 있다.”(And North Korea also lashed out at the LGBT is “decay of bourgeois at the end of a century”.), 《미국 공인회계사 손헌수의 시카고 통신》
And according to testimony of North Korean defectors, LGBTs were shot to death at North Korea. Thank you. --Idh0854 (talk) 16:57, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Also, according to source of Japanese wikipedia, Woman's LGBT was publicly executed in North Korea. Thank you. --Idh0854 (talk) 02:39, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Same-sex union legislation Chile
I noticed that you deleted my entries for Chile (and replaced one for 2013 which is wrong as you can read in the references) arguing that These bills died in the committee, they were not voted by the parliament. I don't know where did you get that information which is incorrect as you may see in the references I posted. I intend to put my entries again if there is no objection in the talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kallme (talk • contribs) 21:31, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
Recognition of same-sex unions in Albania
I removed that part because it misleadingly suggested that same-sex marriage was not legalized because of the boycott.There was nor real promise,it was actually just a political stunt by the premier to suggest that Albania is european.Now that the opposition has returned to the Parliament the government has never mentioned the issue at all even if we are in an election year Vargmali (talk) 06:58, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
Edit summary
"Bad idea" is a very poor edit summary, it tells me nothing as to why you reverted. CTF83! 23:52, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
Marriage Equality Maps
Please stop outright reverting my map edits. diff If you would like to change something, alter what I have added, and then upload an improved version.
When you revert something I have worked hard on, I do not feel good about the Wikipedia project. WP:BITE
I do not think “looks bad” is a useful edit summary diffdiff and summaries written this way hurt my feelings as a wikipedian. Thank you ―Info por favor (talk) 17:33, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
You are now a reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges. A full list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on will be at Special:StablePages.
Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
i saw that u added another bill for SSM in Italy. I made a quick research and found that there are dozens of other bills which would establish SSM/civil unions/registered partnerships and have been presented to the parliament in this legislative period! So what should we do? I need to add them all or remove the ones we already put in the list! What do you think?
Additionally i looked at the members of the Justice comitteee and those bills don't have a chance to pass that stage, if the government isn't united on bringing a bill forward.Olliyeah (talk) 21:56, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ron, I moved the discussion from here to Template_talk:Same-sex_unions#Mexico as the issue seems to be recurrent in the template. I hope you don't mind. Cheers, --Xocoyotzin (talk) 22:53, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Template:LGBT in Japan
Yaoi has nothing to do with LGBT. Yaoi is culture of the heterosexuals. It is inappropriate to write in Template:LGBT in Japan.
Yaoi was produced in Japan of the 1970s by a heterosexually oriented woman. It is Mori Mari first to have written. Yaoi is culture of the heterosexuals. Most of gay men do not read Yaoi. It has nothing to do with the culture of LGBT.--Leoxaq (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
Template:LGBT in Japan it's appropriate place to write about it. It's related topic. Ron 1987 (talk) 07:27, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
Yaoi is a cltures of the heterosexuals, by the heterosexuals, for the heterosexuals. It isn't related topic.--Leoxaq (talk) 07:47, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
You don't have any reliable sources to support your claims. Yaoi presents homoerotic or homoromantic male androphilic sexual relationships, so it is related topic. ~~
Yaio is an imaginary product of the hetero woman. It is different from the real homosexual. source:「オトコノコのためのボーイフレド」（1986,Japan）P72.--121.103.7.76 (talk) 02:53, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited LGBT rights in Moldova, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pîrliţa (check to confirm|fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ• Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:58, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
LGBT adoption (Portugal)
Hi, you may have noticed my edit of your edit of my edit in LGBT adoption. I'm very open to any better drafting, but it is indeed incorrect to say that the bill was rejected in the second vote. The reference you gave yourself clearly says "adiamento da votação" ("postponement of vote"), so there was no second vote and the bill is technically still pending (as the parliamentary site I have referred to also says), but for the time being effectively blocked, while the motion to have a referendum is being discussed. Sigur (talk) 23:03, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Polish article on civil partnerships
Please have a look at Polish article on Civil partnerships. It has been owned by a few editors. Have a look yourself.--188.79.94.53 (talk) 20:27, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
What is your problem?
It seems that you clearly intend to undo/delete every edit/contribution I make. Do you like to bite much? --Keshetsven (talk) 16:34, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Reference Errors on 8 December
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
I know others have said it before here on your talk page, but I'd like to remind you to use edit summaries so others have an idea what your edits change or intend to do. (I know I don't always use it myself, but I try to think of it.) Thanks! SPQRobin (talk) 14:20, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Date formatting
I just reverted your change in date format because WP:BADDATEFORMAT says that DD-MM-YYYY is an "unacceptable date format". It looks like you've been making a bunch of these edits, so you should probably go back and fix them. TDL (talk) 19:04, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Review
Hi, what does it mean when someone "reviews" a Wikipedia page? I got a notification that said you reviewed Same-sex marriage in Kentucky.. --Prcc27 (talk) 03:16, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
My name is Kenneth Grima a Maltese citizen and I phoned few days ago at the Public Registry Department in Malta to the head of the department Ms.Melinda Zahra to see what documents I need to register my marriage ( I married in 2005 in The Netherlands as my husband is Dutch) and it is gonna be recognized as a marriage but they will be registering them from mid to end of June 2014 as soon as all paper work is effected. The Law although published in both Maltese and English the Maltese version is the effective one and in the Maltese version it is clearly stated that foreign marriages effected abroad will be recognized as marriages and nothing inferior to that. If you want to check for yourself, her e-mail is ermelinda.zahra@gov.mt. One cannot base on the English version as Maltese is the official language when it comes to laws and legal matters, so if you are not a Maltese native speaker it will be very difficult for you or for anybody else to translate correctly the Maltese version and the English one is just for guidance more than offical laws in fact it is stipulated by law that if there are any differences between the 2 versions the Maltese one takes always precedence. Kenneth Grima ) 12:38, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
Wiki Loves Pride 2014
Hi Ron. (I think you are familiar with this efforts, but...) In case you are not aware, there is an upcoming campaign to improve coverage of LGBT-related topics on Wikipedia, culminating with an international edit-a-thon on June 21. See Wiki Loves Pride 2014 for more information. If you are interested, you might consider creating a page for a major city (or cities!) near you, with a list of LGBT-related articles that need to be created or improved. This would be a tremendous help to Wikipedia and coverage of LGBT culture and history. Thanks for your consideration, and please let me know if you have any questions! --Another Believer(Talk) 16:43, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
], [[Cyprus]], [[Greece]], [[Israel]], [[Italy]], [[Peru]], [[Philippines]], [[Poland]] and [[Slovenia].
28aa01%29.pdf |title=Article 64, 1992 Constitution of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (as amended 25 December 2001 |format=PDF |accessdate=2014-01-05}}</ref>
It's not letting me move it. Here's what comes up: The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid. GayTenn (talk) 03:04, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect LGBT rights in the Pitcairn Islands. Since you had some involvement with the LGBT rights in the Pitcairn Islands redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Greggydude (talk) 18:11, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect LGBT rights in Inner Mongolia. Since you had some involvement with the LGBT rights in Inner Mongolia redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. TheChampionMan1234 00:18, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Same sex marriage in Kosovo; using the old constitution.
The constitution that you provided information from is no longer available. The new constitution was ruled in 2008 and it clearly states the same sex marriage position. The new constitution made the headlines with this topic.
Do you happen to know or are able to find any source on when the Luxembourg law might be promulgated by the Grand Duke, and we can uncloak Luxembourg on the same-sex unions template? Dralwik|Have a Chat 19:01, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
Can you give me a reason why you reverted the neutral term 'public promotion of LGBT issues' and added the liberally biased term 'Pride parade'? The term 'Pride parade' is not a WP:NPOV. –Plarem(Usertalk) 09:58, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Your term is certanly not neutral and is weird. Stop to impose your personal views. There is no consensus for this change. You should read BRD, Consensus. Ron 1987 (talk) 21:02, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
For your help determining a pattern of disruptive behavior from a POV editor on a large number of LGBT related articles.--Mark Miller (talk) 20:36, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
What?Wiki Loves Pride, a campaign to document and photograph LGBT culture and history, including pride events
When?June 2015
How can you help?
1.) Create or improve LGBT-related articles and showcase the results of your work here
2.) Upload photographs or other media related to LGBT culture and history, including pride events, and add images to relevant Wikipedia articles; feel free to create a subpage with a gallery of your images (see examples from last year)
Or, view or update the current list of Tasks. This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. Visit the group's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome!
So I'm not sure if you noticed it yet, but committees in both chambers of the Swiss legislature have approved a motion for a Constitutional amendment which would legalize marriage for all, regardless of sexual orientation or gender, as well as opening registered partnerships for opposite sex couples. Does this have to be approved by the a full vote in parliament or is it essentially a done deal now? If it is, should we make a new entry similar to the one we created for Ireland in the legislation page? I look forward to your input. Chase1493 (talk) 19:35, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
Legislation periode ended in Switzerland. All motions, which are not voted, end at eletion day in Switzerland. Bildsucher445 (talk) 16:48, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Barnstar
The Special Barnstar
This barnstar is for your outstanding work on LGBT article editing and creation. Me-123567-Me (talk) 20:05, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
Wiki Loves Pride 2016
As a participant of WikiProject LGBT studies, you are invited to participate in the third annual Wiki Loves Pride campaign, which runs through the month of June. The purpose of the campaign is to create and improve content related to LGBT culture and history. How can you help?
Create or improve LGBT-related Wikipedia pages and showcase the results of your work here
Document local LGBT culture and history by taking pictures at pride events and uploading your images to Wikimedia Commons
Looking for topics? The Tasks page, which you are welcome to update, offers some ideas and wanted articles.
This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. The group's mission is to develop LGBT-related content across all Wikimedia projects, in all languages. Visit the affiliate's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome! If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's talk page.
Hi, I'd just like to note that you revertedPrcc27's edit without providing any edit summary. I think adding Finland made sense, but it doesn't really matter to me either way, I just think it is important to provide a reasoning, or at least simply stating you are reverting an edit, rather than just silently undoing it. Thank you, SPQRobin (talk) 14:01, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Europe 10,000 Challenge invite
Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:08, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
Reference errors on 12 November
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Hello, Ron 1987. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
I want to talk to you regarding my intended changes to the wiki page in the 'Subject/headline' title above.
One of the reasons why I want to make these changes is to better reflect the vote tally, even if the mistakes weren't fixed on that particular website about the official vote count:
1) Both the Swedish People's Party Parliamentary Group and two other MPs have stated that they've voted a certain way by mistake and wished to correct that record (see [1]TenorTwelve (talk) 23:09, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, Ron 1987. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello Ron 1987, Me-123567-Me has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! Me-123567-Me (talk) 00:29, 8 December 2017 (UTC) Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Polls
Hello,
Please agree to stop removing the Dutch Eurobarometer poll. You are putting on the same level a poll done by the EC with thousands of one-on-one interviews and another done by an aquatic association. There is too much difference in the numbers to say that the IGLA has not done something wrong.
Nope, your personal opinion is certainly not a reason to give a Eurobarometer poll a preferential treatment. Ron 1987 (talk) 01:14, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello. I tend to agree with WhatsUpWorld here, as even though the Eurobarometer poll was conducted one year earlier, it is generally more reliable as it was conducted by an organization under the European Commision. I believe the public support for sex marriage could not have fallen by 27% in a single year. I ask you to take into account the information stated in both surveys and make your own conclusions. Cheers, FriyManPer aspera ad astra 20:20, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
More reliable? Because you think so? Polls differs between each other, sometimes significantly. It is nothing unusual. Show reliable sources questioning ILGA's reliability, otherwise, your claim is baseless. Ron 1987 (talk) 22:47, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
I hope you're doing well. This is not having to do with edits, but in case you haven't heard, a political party in Poland (Modern) has proposed partnerships, including for same-sex couples! It's very possible you have heard this already, but I thought since you self-identify as Polish on your page and support same-sex marriage, I thought you would appreciate hearing the news! I'm not sure if this is a proposed or pending bill; I think it will be a while until legislation could pass, but this definitely is an important and significant development! I thought you might want to know. The article is in Polish. [2] I found an English translation from @LGBTmarriage on Twitter.[3]
(Was I sensitive enough or was this a weird message?)
Same-sex marriage
Hi, Ron. The information is both factual and very well-sourced. The new information is important because it covers notable topics that surround same-sex marriage. Aren't the additions helpful and informative? Looking forward to hearing from you, --Justthefacts9 (talk) 02:43, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi, Ron. The research on suicides is very important and quite notable (and well sourced), because of how significant the effect was. It makes sense to place it prominently in the lead given it's importance, or else it may be not viewed. As for the mention of civil rights campaigning in 1970s in the US, perhaps it could be worded a little differently? Would you like to suggest a better way to phrase it so that it's accurately stated? Looking forward to hearing from you, --Justthefacts9 (talk) 03:29, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
The research is about a general effect which could be extrapolated to other countries. It's a very well-known study that ranks as the #1 viewed pediatrics study in the Journal of the American Medical Association. Indeed, the study is so globally prominent that it was used as an important argument in favor of same-sex marriage by health experts in Australia, during the referendum campaign there (), who extrapolated the data to Australia. That's how notable the study is. --Justthefacts9 (talk) 04:00, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
needles?
You used the word "needles" as an edit comment. I do not know this word. Can you please elaborate? Also the edit you made, seems as it was an error. It looks like an revert. But if it was, then there would have been a revert comment and I would have been notified. Would you please undo this edit yourself? --C.Suthorn (talk) 18:58, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
Opinion polling for the next Slovenian parliamentary election listed at Redirects for discussion
We're lucky if these polls are +/- 5%, and that's just the theoretical error from the sample size. Throw in real-world confounding factors, and it's gonna be worse than that. So, really, even reporting to the nearest 1% is unrealistically optimistic. There's no way we can justify reporting results to the nearest 0.1%, not unless we also give the sampling error (as we did in the US table). — kwami (talk) 03:12, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
Can u create a new page please
Hi sorry to bother u again
And please respond with a yes or no this time so i know if i should ask another editor
but can u pls Create this timeline page by translating it from spanish
in the table of same sex marriage in the faroe islands edit the first table under the map in gay marriage since 2017 it redericts to denmark and not to faroe island marriage page Can u fix that please Sorry again AdamPrideTN (talk) 23:01, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
An update maybe
reports that two anti-#LGBT bills, including a marriage ban bill, which passed the Senate last year, have still not advanced in the lower house
Since when did the LGBT activists accuse each other of vandalism? --Терпр (talk) 13:26, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Why the removal of categories
I know maybe you will ignore me and dont respond again
But its okay
Just wanted to ask why the removal of categories
Im not wrong in mutting them for example this romanian latest one was a one in opposition of ssm pushed by religious conservatives
Whats the difference with the upcoming tiawanese one or slovakian or croatian ones that passed
Ssu legislatiin isnt it by these referzndums i found it in irish one usnt it the same with aussie one too
Strange but ok:/ AdamPrideTN (talk) 04:19, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
Hello, Ron 1987. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello
I created a dreaft about Draft:Same-sex marriage in South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands from information that i can only find from the net
Its short i know but its a jurisdiction so i think it deserves it's own like other overseas territories
Do u know how and Would u help in any way to make it a page and not just a draft
Thank you AdamPrideTN (talk) 11:44, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi, you removed a paragragh that I added in the edit before. However, it should be done as an actual revert with an edit summary explaining it. I don't know if it's intentional, but simply removing what has just been added is not so polite (or arguably even passive-aggressive). If you disagree with an addition, it should rather be discussed with arguments; I'm more of an inclusionist and think the information is relevant. Thanks, SPQRobin (talk) 13:33, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
Same sex unions in Poland
Hi
Sorry but the law and constitution specefically without doubt ban same sex marriages and uses man wome
The law was not striken down by the suoreme or constitutional court of the country
The statuoary ban still exist and as u know u doubt that the right conservative parliament and goverment will never change the law nor accept itvesides the same marriage was not recognised so
Is it wise to assume as many did like in marriages ban or recongnition in europe or european union pages that poland no longer still has a constitutional marriage ban
I think it does have and will have it
So editing wrongly other pages on that is wrong? Should we revert them to point that poland still has the ban it dasnt striken down or changed u know
What do u think?
Thank u AdamPrideTN (talk) 01:58, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
"Recognized"
Hey. If we list Netherlands under recognition in the SSM template, despite the fact that the islands only rec SSM per local law, then shouldn't we list the UK? Northern Ireland recs SSM from elsewhere in the UK per local law, exactly analogous to the Netherlands. And if we don't list Italy, Croatia, Hungary, Estonia, Switzerland, San Marino etc. who do the same, because they have CU's, then why should we list Aruba, which also has CU's, or the other Dutch islands, which don't even have that? It seems completely inconsistent. IMO, we should only list countries under "marriage" if the unions are treated as marriage, which they are in Mexico and Israel (and possibly Armenia), but not, AFAICT, anywhere else. If they're treated as CU's, then they should be listed under CU's, and if they're given only limited recognition, then they should be listed under limited recognition. — kwami (talk) 17:47, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
LGBT history in Mexico
Hello
I was planning to create a Timeline of LGBT history in Mexico (which i did now) u can find it in the history section that is still there
I was going to leave the history of precolumbian and moved to the history part that there is now
And move the timeline section to a new timeline page
(I hope its clear)
A pity now that there is some editor who erased all the first history part containing timeline
And now its blocked and i cannot find it to move it to the new intended article of timeline of LGBT History in Mexico
Any idea how can that valuable content of the first removed history can be found and moved to the new page
Any help please
Thank you AdamPrideTN (talk) 14:14, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
Oaxaca II
Hi Ron,
Do you know what's going on in Oaxaca? I reverted an edit to SSM in Mex, but more recent refs seem to support. I'm letting you know because you reverted that editor's claims about Hidalgo, so I wonder if your not reverting Oaxaca was an oversight or if you have better sources on what's going on. — kwami (talk) 03:31, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello Ron, I would like to let you know that a few users are vandalizing the article same-sex marriage. They insist to remove sourced researches that have found that children to same-sex couples grow just as well or even better than children to other couples. They claim that these researches are not sourced, even though they are perfectly sourced. They probably do this because these professional scientific researches do not conform to their anti-LGBT agenda. I would highly appreciate it if you could participate in the talk page. We must not allow anti-LGBT bias in this important article. Thank you! Guycn2 · ☎ 22:23, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi the latest 2019 ilga report is very important and highly big and informative Many lgbt country pages in africa asia and (even americas) need to be updated urhently Take ur time and check and hope u can update the countries Some unapdated even from 2011
There is also the blog erasing 76 Like this just write the name of country and erasing 76 in google like that
Also there is The U.S. Department of State's 2019 Human Rights Report
I would do it happily but i'm focusing much on the translating English LGBT content pages into Arabic all the time and can't much
Thx good luck (no pressure of course, just a suggestion) AdamPrideTN (talk) 08:37, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
Are one of the best sites woth sources that provides daily updates about lgbt rights (some that go unedited for weeks)
I would advice you to check them from time to time for updates
I would do what i can happily but i'm focusing much on the translating English LGBT content pages into Arabic all the time and can't much
Thx good luck (no pressure of course, just a suggestion) AdamPrideTN (talk) 08:53, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
Mariage amendments template
Hi i know that u will mostly just ignore me and not respond to this as usual
But ok!
This is from Mongolia page
Marriage is defined as a heteronormative institution in Article 16 (11) of the Mongolian Constitution as: "Marriage is based on the equality and mutual consent of a man and a woman who have reached the age determined by law. The State protects the interests of the family, motherhood, and the child." Same-sex relationships are not recognized under Mongolian law.
Ok about Venezuela i added the ban and asked @Jedi Friend: to paint venezuela red in the map with a ban
However @Kwamikagami: quoted
The Court ruled that the Constitution does not prohibit same-sex de facto unions, but also does not require their recognition.[6]
And so he reverted the venezuela ban from the map but its lgbt right page still lists the ban so any idea please?!! AdamPrideTN (talk) 23:46, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads-up re. Mongolia. Re. Venezuela, could you link to where I said that, so I can check the ref again? — kwami (talk) 00:54, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
Hello
As i was reviewing both Venezuela pages of lgbt rights and recognition of same-sex unions
It seems clearly that
Same-sex marriage and de facto union constituionally banned since 1999
The Constitution of Venezuela, adopted in 1999, defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman, thus constitutionally banning same-sex marriage.[4] Article 77 of the Constitution reads as follows:[5]
Marriage between a man a woman, which is based on free consent and absolute equality of rights and obligations of the spouses, is protected. A stable de facto union between a man and a woman which meets the requirements established by law shall have the same effects as marriage.
Also, there is no legal recognition of same-sex couples explicitly in Venezuelan law.
Of course all of this is as yet because there are positive news about change but as u know with the crisis there and everything i think all of that will be delayed and i doubt gay marriage will be a priority there
so can u please fix this map
Recognition of same-sex unions in South America
Marriage
Other type of partnership
Unrecognized
Constitution limits marriage to opposite-sex couples
Same-sex sexual activity illegal, though penalties not enforced
To reflect that Venezuela is also red too as both Paraguay and Bolivia
Thank you
U said on the wiki commons map dated May 29, 2019
Reverted to version as of 14:07, 21 January 2018 (UTC) please see talk, start new thread if sources contradict it
And so i went to talk pages
And i am sorry i dont know what talk u refered to in that
Do anyway in LGBT rights in Venezuela page i kept the ban info
Then if u see the history of recognition of same-sex unions in Venezuela page u will see that @Ron 1987: (which he always ignores me and never respond to any of my talks but that's ok, and if he thinks should be elsewhere that's ok too) added and correct it by sources in the last days.
So it is only still the map thing
A pity that Mr. @Jedi Friend: said he is now taking a vacation and will be back soon. We can wait for him to respond in the coming days if thats better, but for me and Mr. @Jedi Friend: and maybe Mr. @Ron 1987: all agree that Venezuela should be painted red with a ban for now as u know the political crisis there for now.
Also what do u think of Mr @Ron 1987: saying that the ban of Mongolia is not true and him reverting that.
Hope i can get ur input soon
Thx, Cheers AdamPrideTN (talk) 12:54, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
Since SSM is legal in all states, I've changed the 'legal?' columns in the tables to whether the state has overturned their law, which is where the little action there is will now be. Would you mind checking that I didn't get any wrong?
Thanks, — kwami (talk) 22:26, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Belize appeal was won
I put sources in LGBT rights in Belize, but am sure the ruling effects other templates, etc. Happy New Year. SusunW (talk) 00:17, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Editor's Barnstar
Dear Ron,
I don't know how to the referencing properly. Let's try this one you have done:
In the archive section. where did you get "web/20200528135740" from? Could you kindly teach me? I have been struggling with this for years and no one could ever be able to answer me. Thank you so much! Khhmel 16:19, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:24, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
SSM Japan
Hi,
With the recent SC ruling that SS couples can get alimony etc, recognizing them as domestic partnerships, do you think Japan should be light blue or medium blue on the map? DPs are normally med blue, but there are different conceptions of what a DP is, so I was hesitant to go that far.
The Wikimedia LGBTQ+ User Group is holding online working days in May. As a member of WikiProject LGBT studies, editing on LGBTQ+ issues or if you identify as part of the LGBTQ+ community, come help us set goals, develop our organisation and structures, consider how to respond to issues faced by Queer editors, and plan for the next 12 months.
We will be meeting online for 3 half-days, 14–16 May at 1400–1730 UTC. While our working language is English, we are looking to accommodate users who would prefer to participate in other languages, including translation facilities.
↑ link #77 in subscript 'c.' of the info-box).
2) Also, RKP (or SPP) MP Eva Biaudet was answering to inquiries by two Twitter users (https://twitter.com/EvaBiaudet/status/808914634958897152), regarding this particular vote, by stating that her party made a mistake in this vote and has already asked for a correction in the "minutes" (see Item #1 above).
Another reason why I made the most recent change(s) to that particular section of the page is because I wanted to avoid getting into a heated confrontation with you (since you were the only one that seems to be undoing some of the changes that I've been making) and risk being banned from editing (or creating, if I'm interested in doing so) any Wiki pages.
I thought it would be best to provide my reasoning(s) in a calm and rational matter. I hope to hear from you soon, regarding this subject and if you don't wish to comment back, then I still thank you for taking the time to read through all this. Have a nice week. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KLO2015 (talk • contribs) 19:54, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
Do you know how to edit the LGBT rights world map?
Hi, do you by any chance know how to edit the LGBT rights world map? There are many inaccuracies that need to be corrected but I don't know how to edit maps. Estonia, Malta, Israel, Peru (although the decision is currently appealed), and the Australian states of Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, Tasmania, New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory all DO fully recognise same-sex marriages performed abroad, therefore they must be coloured cyan blue. Xylo kai Gyali (talk) 16:02, 31 January 2017 (UTC) Xylo kai Gyali (talk) 16:02, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Same-sex marriage in BIOT
Hello, Ron1987.
I was hoping you could check my interpretation of these documents as per the legality of same-sex marriage in the British Indian Ocean Territory.
First, a link to a United States Navy Document, affirming the right to marry, with the caveat that one of the two parties of the union shall be reassigned: http://www.public.navy.mil/bupers-npc/reference/milpersman/1000/1300Assignment/Documents/1300-314.pdf
Second, the Overseas Marriage (Armed Forces) Order 2014, which I interpret as pertinent to British Armed Forces Personnel in the BIOT. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2014/9780111108802
Also, thanks for all of your contributions to LGBT rights pages. Your thoroughness is much appreciated!Andrew1444 (talk) 01:16, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
Hi, your edit summary was not representative of what you actually deleted, which I consider rude behaviour. If you think the lead is not the best place for explaining what other acts were amended as a consequence to amendments to the Marriage Act, that's a good point, move them further. However, you deleted the of information I had written in English, about the amendments to the social security legislation. Mere list in External links doesn't tell anything to a non-Finnish reader because the actual paragraphs don't specify at all what exact amendment packages were approved and when (first Marriage Act, second Population Register etc., third social security). The plain text should have direct references to the official legislative sources; as you might have noticed, the English Yle articles couldn't be more unspecific..:) My whole point is: I seriously spent an hour doing that edit. If you disagree with how the article should be constructed, please leave a message to the talk page and please invite me to discuss the improvements, instead of deleting stuff without any reconsiderations. That's very frustrating. -- Puisque (talk) 05:52, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Information about second implementation bill making changes in social security legislation is included in marriage section. Ron 1987 (talk) 06:02, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Ok, that was obviously my mistake. Sorry. However, the link to the second bill (Act on Population Information System and the certicate services of the Population Register Centre (661/2009), Act on Legal Recognition of the Gender of Transsexuals (563/2002), and Religious Freedom Act (453/2003)), is dead, you might retrieve it from what I wrote. -- Puisque (talk) 06:23, 17 April 2017 (UTC) Puisque (talk) 06:23, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Wiki Loves Pride 2017
You are invited to create and improve LGBT-related content at Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects throughout the month of June as part of the fourth annual Wiki Loves Pride campaign. Feel free to add new and expanded content on the project's Results page. Happy editing! ---Another Believer(Talk) 15:04, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello Ron 1987! Follow the Wikimedia LGBT user group on Twitter at @wikilgbt for news, photos, and other topics of interest to LGBT Wikipedans and allies. Use #wikiLGBT to share any Wiki Loves Pride stuff that you would like to share (whether this month or any day of the year) or to alert folks to things that the LGBT Wikipedan community should know. RachelWex (talk)
For more information about Wiki Loves Pride, → click here ←.
RachelWex 17:48, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
Germany allows same sex marriage
I made a change on the same sex unions in europe page as I read that Germany now allows same sex marriage. Source https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jun/30/germany-poised-legalise-same-sex-marriage-bill-law .
Btw I am convinced the percentage of European people living in European countries without some sort of same sex civil union is way off. That is , this percentage is way too high. Caused by including people living in Asia (siberia even in case of Russia) , living in the Asian part of Turkey and so on. If you could look into this, appreciated. Grsd (talk) 09:35, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
SMILE!! 9 July 2017
Hello Ron 1987, Me-123567-Me has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! Me-123567-Me (talk) 16:25, 9 July 2017 (UTC) Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Hey,
I'm a new Wikipedian and I was wondering why you removed the link to Politics of the Marshall Islands in the see also section of LGBT rights in the Marshall Islands. Is this because you think LGBT rights should not be conflated with politics because they are human rights? Are there any pages where I can read more about what related pages are appropriate for LGBT Rights pages?
Thanks in advance for your time!:) Jchmrt (talk) 18:15, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
Same-sex marriage in Norway
Hello,
I've noticed that you removed all of the content, regarding SSM in Norway, from its respective wiki page. I'm just curious: How would you add the information to the wiki article? I was able to obtain the information regarding the vote records on the issues of SSM and adoption in Norway from someone who works closely with the Norwegian Parliament ( Marthe Hommerstad (Advisor, Archives of the Storting) <Marthe.Hommerstad@stortinget.no>). After going through a number of personal inquiries with her by email, she sent me a number of images regarding those voting records and have stated (quote): "The information is public, even though we have not published it. Therefore it should not be a problem to use the information, and use the images..." Since the vote records weren't officially published, there would be no way of finding this type of information online unless you happen to know someone who would happen to have them posted online somewhere that is publicly accessible.
Also, regarding the composition of the Norwegian Parliament, I wasn't able to find anything on this issue pre-2009 (when the upper house of the Storting was abolished and all 169 elected MPs would sit in one chamber instead of being divided into two separate ones). That Norwegian wiki article was the closest source that I could find on this matter since the votes took place when there were still two separate houses.
So, I would like to know your opinion on how you would find and present this information since they were difficult to come across, or unless you would rather leave this page as it is until the said information could be made more easily accessible online. I have searched through the Storting website, but couldn't find the information that was provided to me by Ms. Hommerstad
Please respond as soon as possible, thank you.
KLO2015 (talk) 02:23, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
Template:Same-sex unions
Why did you revertmy edit of {{Same-sex unions}}? I gave a reason for my edit in the edit summary, but there's nothing in your edit summary to explain the revert. Mitch Ames (talk) 11:56, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
Where does this go?.....
Hey Ron, I was wondering. Where does this go on the Same-sex union legislation page?
So Bermuda had a court order to legalize same-sex marriage. Now there is a legislative effort to repeal it and replace it with domestic partnerships. It's pending. I don't know if it would be considered Constitutional, though, so if it passes it may get struck down, but I'm not sure. Should we just ignore this one and wait and see what happens? I don't want to be in a position to do this type of edit, but could we put it (potentially) under efforts to legalize unions and say something like repeal and replace with domestic partnerships? That would be kind of antithetical to the point and could potentially give energy to the other side across the globe potentially. Do you have any thoughts on this? An article on it<ref>http://www.royalgazette.com/politics/article/20171103/bill-to-replace-gay-marriage-is-unveiled.
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed your recent edit to Same-sex marriage in Iceland does not have an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! Me-123567-Me (talk) 18:44, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
.svg)
.jpg){kind=logo}
.svg#mw-jump-to-license){kind=link}