Talk:Anti-gender movement/Archive 3
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Need to make the lead neutral
I have repeatedly tried to address the issue of NPOV violation in this article but each time my post has been deleted without any explanation. Please stop doing this.
The whole article, especially the lead, has a massive left-wing bias (as noted by many other commenters). The claim that this "movement" is only restricted to right-wingers is extremely dubious and only made by far-left sources. Highly reliable sources show that majority of people in the US and the UK suport the beliefs of this so-called movement. This must be mentioned in the lead instead of making it appear that only right-wing loonies believe in it. 2001:569:7EFA:5D00:FD49:3AB4:4B6C:19C3 (talk) 12:45, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
- The sources you link don't mention the subject of the article. (t · c) buidhe 18:30, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
- The sources discuss about public opinion on the issues mentioned in this article but doesn't seem to directly mention the subject. Citing them will probably be considered improper synthesis? Jack234567 (talk) 20:17, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, see wp:or (t · c) buidhe 00:55, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
- The sources discuss about public opinion on the issues mentioned in this article but doesn't seem to directly mention the subject. Citing them will probably be considered improper synthesis? Jack234567 (talk) 20:17, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Not neutral
Unproductive thread full of red links that are red for good reasons. Has veered off into WP:NOTFORUM and WP:IDHT territory and generally wasting people's time. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
This article reads as an enumeration of ‘gender critical is fascism’. Please stop this very biased agenda. The anti-gender movement indeed started from the conservative and alt-right side, but consists currently also out of a wide variety of people. Detransers with trans regret are not conservative or alt-right. It is very disrespectful to corner those poor people in such a corner. Concerned parents (which is an eufemism for parents in panic) with kids that come out as trans from one day to another, totally out of the blue (ROGD) are not radical alt-right parents. Also writers such as Abigail Shrier, Debra Soh, Sasha Ayad and in particular Dr Az Hakeem are progressive, not conservative at all. Hakeem is a goth even and worries about young gay persons mostly. He also worries about what he calls as ‘parents with Transhausen by proxy’, as a variant of Munchhausen by proxy. Provocative yes, but this has nothing to do with a political corner. 2A02:A443:5030:1:79EC:A8A:EDE2:2C62 (talk) 10:42, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
|
Title is nonsense
The title of the article is obviously nonsense given that most members of that movement believe in genders. It’s a simple matter of logic. Please don’t delete other editors’ commments. Rather debate here as a rational person should do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ExperiencedArticleFixerBot (talk • contribs) 19:27, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
- While I might not have removed this post, the request is not actionable. Wikipedia article titles are based on what reliable sources call it, and you've provided no sources that use another name nor any evidence such a name better fits the WP:article title criteria. Compare the move request I made yesterday at Talk:Immunomodulatory_imide_drug#Requested_move_4_December_2023, where there is a concrete proposal of a specific name supported by evidence. (t · c) buidhe 19:37, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
- Concur with buidhe. Mathglot (talk) 11:53, 23 December 2023 (UTC)