Talk:Jim Fouratt

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jim Fouratt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110928020912/http://www.nycny.com/columns/nichols/nichols6-23-00.html to http://www.nycny.com/columns/nichols/nichols6-23-00.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:16, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:51, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Jim Fouratt by Peter Hujar.jpg

Page protection
Hi all. Have briefly protected the page to stop the current edit-warring. Can editors with an interest in this article please discuss wording here and reach consensus on what (if any) changes are required. Page protection will expire in 3 days, hopefully enough time for that discussion to occur.

Apologies to anyone who wanted to make other unrelated edits to the article: please feel free to post those as edit requests on this talkpage. -- Euryalus (talk) 07:34, 23 November 2022 (UTC)


 * @Euryalus The wording that was introduced by @Als8888 (was viciously harassed by trans rights activist and Coach model Amara Velazquez who screamed homophobic slurs in his face while simultaneously claiming to be pro-LGBTQIA+) is biased. I have no problem in mentioning the "LetWomenSpeak" event in the article, but this isn't the way to do so, especially with the sources all being from Twitter (WP:RSPTWITTER). Liliana UwU  (talk / contribs) 07:45, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
 * thanks for the message. Absolutely agree re twitter not being a reliable source, and the biased tone of the material you quote above. The protection is just to create space for discussion on (a) whether reliable secondary sources confirm any confrontation actually occurred, (b) whether there is any encyclopedically relevant context, and (c) whether anything on this topic is notable enough for inclusion or is giving undue weight to a trivial event. I don't have a view on any of these points, so am happy to leave that discussion to others. In the mean time the challenged material is not in the protected version of the article, and nor should it be per the lack of reliable sourcing and the precedence of WP:BLP.


 * In passing this is separate to the WP:NOTHERE issue you raise about a specific editor's contributions, which I haven't yet reviewed. -- Euryalus (talk) 09:18, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
 * @Euryalus I'd say that since the event is trivial enough to lack RS, it shouldn't be included. That's just my (admittedly slightly biased) opinion, though. Liliana UwU  (talk / contribs) 23:08, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 23 November 2022
In the infobox "American" should not be linked per MOS:OVERLINK. Robby.is.on (talk) 12:57, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅. -- Euryalus (talk) 13:18, 23 November 2022 (UTC)