Talk:Lesbian

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lesbian article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

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

Article policies

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

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19: 2 months

Lesbian has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
February 25, 2009	Good article nominee	Listed
March 11, 2009	Peer review	Reviewed

Current status: Good article

Gold star lesbian was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 8 April 2018 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Lesbian. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

LGBTQ+ studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies

Sexology and sexuality Top‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sociology High‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women

Women's History High‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article relates to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, a contentious topic. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator.

Lesbian page edit statistics

Wikipedia Page History Statistics
http://vs.aka-online.de/cgi-bin/wppagehiststat.pl

project: en.wikipedia
page: Lesbian | or | page: Talk:Lesbian

Pyxis Solitary (yak yak). Ol' homo. 10:58, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ridicoulus

The 1690 image picturing an "hermaphrodite" man is ridiculous. Clearly this is a homosexual male. You´re making a fool of yourselves. 86.17.83.128 (talk) 00:39, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do you understand the concept of a hermaphrodite? Seven77seas (talk) 03:36, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ridicoulus 🤣🤣🤣 a fool of yourselves 🤣🤣🤣 Seven77seas (talk) 03:42, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Article review

It has been a while since this article has been reviewed, so I took a look and noticed the following:

There are some uncited statements, including entire paragraphs,
The article, at over 15,000 words, is too detailed and WP:TOOBIG. Should some of this information be spun out, summarised more effectively, or removed?

Should this article go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 01:26, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand the obsession among many editors with splitting articles that are entirely about one comprehensive subject. Is this article going to be split as: Lesbian Part I and Lesbian Part 2? When the Gay article was split it made sense because the term can mean two things: one use describes homosexual men, and the other use is the primary meaning which became intertwined with sexuality.
As for reassessing its Good article standing: sure. Why not? Knock yourselves out. Pyxis Solitary (yak). ⚢ 10:45, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Pyxis Solitary: I invite editors to read WP:SIZE, which outlines why the length is considered for Wikipedia articles. Basically, readers struggle with finding information they are looking for when the article is too long, especially on mobile. Some places the article could be split are the headings titles: "Etymology of lesbian", "History of lesbianism" (which is already spun out]]), "Demographics of lesbianism", "Lesbian health"/"Health and lesbianism", and "Media portrayal of lesbians]" (already spun out). Summaries of those sections (typically 2-4 paragraphs) can be written remain in the article when the information is spun out. Z1720 (talk) 12:24, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the article should be trimmed pretty extensively. There's a lot of places that go into unnecessary detail, like providing unnecessary short biographies of important lesbian figures that could be replaced by a brief mention and link to their page, or people spelling out a current dispute in too great detail.

Re: citations: I'm not sure where you're seeing uncited ones, could you clarify or point it out? I see a lot of places where there's, e.g., four sentences followed by one citation, and I've assumed those are instances where one citation is supposed to cover/provide all the information in those four sentences. Seven77seas (talk) 18:12, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Seven77seas: I have added citation needed templates to statements missing citations. Z1720 (talk) 19:39, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks. I removed some sentences that were vague claims and/or seemed to serve as summaries, topic, or transition sentences, including one I had added as a transitional sentence. I added citations to a couple concrete claims about history that it was easy to find a source for. There are still many needing attention. Seven77seas (talk) 17:17, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed introductory section change

Right now, the introductory section contains two lengthy paragraphs of the development of cultural ideas about lesbian identity in Western society from 1900-present (sexology, wwii, etc). While this may suit perfectly if the article were "History of lesbianism in the West", this article is supposed to be a cover of all aspects of lesbians, everywhere, all times, all issues.

I propose removing these long paragraphs, since they shift the focus of the article a great deal; all the information in them is still included below.

Potentially a short paragraph summarizing the whole article more thoroughly (health; culture; family; history) could be substituted to summarize the full contents of the article better. e.g. "Lesbians have contributed greatly to literature, social change, and politics. While lesbian social movements have greatly increased acceptance in some countries, the cultural and legal landscape worldwide remains uneven."

Thoughts? Talk? Seven77seas (talk) 06:59, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]