Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Queer composers

This page is an archive of the discussion surrounding the proposed deletion of a page entitled List of Queer composers.

Further comments should be made on the talk page rather than here as this page is kept as an historic record.

The result of the debate was to keep the page but rename it List of famous gay, lesbian or bisexual composers.

Article at List of Queer composers

Totally bogus. What has sexual orientation to do with composing music? I am unsure if the people adding this crap are for or against homosexuality, but this approach is, IMHO, troll bait, anti-intellectual, in your face, and just plain silly. Do we want another list of "composers not queer", "bisexual composers", and a fourth list of "composers of uncertain sexual orientation"? If you want to discuss the sexual orientation of individuals, do so under the article about each composer. - Marshman 17:46, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * Keep. Of course sexual orientation has little or nothing to do with composing music. But then neither do the following two factors: nationality and gender. Yet we have a lists for Polish, Italian, Indian, and female composers! (and now African-American composers) I would argue that century, genre, and medium have little to do with composing music, yet we have a List of composers which is broken down into the following categories: film, ragtime, jazz &amp; blues, orchestra, vocal, pop &amp; rock, folk &amp; country, new age, and video games. This page also contains links to the entirely seperate List of classical music composers, List of 20th century classical composers, List of opera composers, and List of uncategorized composers. We also have a list of queer wikipedians, and a list of Famous gay lesbian or bisexual people, despite the fact that being queer has nothing to do with being famous or wiki. These lists are extremely useful for correcting bias and discrimination, I use these lists to find out about people I may never have heard of otherwise. Being against a list of lgbtq composers is not anti-gay, but allowing the deletion of an lgbtq list while keeping lists of women composers and composers of various nationalities would be homophobic. I propose we either keep all the lists, or delete all the lists. Note that we would not need a seperate bisexual composers list because they are included in the queer composers list. Hyacinth
 * Would you say that intersex and T* individuals self-identify as queer and should be on this list? JamesDay 02:27, 25 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * See above discussion of list of biracial people. --zandperl 18:42, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's actually (to me) an interesting list, and as appropriate as other similar lists. Also, it was less than 20 minutes from creation to VfD, and User:Hyacinth is doing a good job adding new content. -- BCorr ¤ &#1041;&#1088;&#1072;&#1081;&#1077;&#1085; 20:48, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * Delete. What is the point? -- Viajero 20:42, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * Delete. Lists were bad enough when they were growing linearly, but now they're growing exponentially! We'll have N professions times M attributes (queer, biracial, overweight, left-handed, Bulgarian, ...). Why stop there, why not a list of queer biracial composers? Overweight left-handed Bulgarian lithographers? Maybe being overweight left-handed and Bulgarian really influences their art. (And yes, Hyacinth, I think we should delete all those lists.) Axlrosen 21:19, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * Some people find it interesting, so keep it. If you don't like lists such as this, just ignore them. --Camembert 23:46, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * Keep. Article has been moved to conform with naming conventions, (lower case "q")  &#9774; Eclecticology 00:27, 2003 Oct 24 (UTC)
 * By all means keep the content. But calling them "queer" strikes me as offensive, and capitalizing "Queer" manages to be both offensive and trendy.  Move it to list of homosexual composers.  -- Smerdis of Tlön 00:25, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * What about transgender or transsexual composers, then? Wendy Carlos immediately comes to mind. Anyway, why not move somewhere to remove the "composer" tag, if it's to be kept; "composer" suggests something quite different Dysprosia 00:34, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * Move to list of allegedly homosexual composers. At least some of the names listed are debatable. Looks like an attempt from the pro-homosexual lobby to &quot;claim&quot; famous people in my opinion. 129.234.4.10 00:34, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * Dear User:80.255/User:129.234.4.10, please stop trolling, i.e.  the pro-homosexual lobby. Having checked out your recent edit history here and here and your talk page historyhere, it seems like you've decided to up the ante. The Donisthorpe pages were quite enough, thank you very much. -- BCorr ¤ &#1041;&#1088;&#1072;&#1081;&#1077;&#1085; 03:37, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * Trolling my foot. I have done nothing but add factual, informative articles; if you have a complaint about any of these, I suggest you put it on my talk page. However, I shall call a spade a spade, and the &amp;quot;Queer Composers&amp;quot; list is nothing if not the work of the Pro-Homosexual Lobby! Who else would produce such a list? 80.255 03:51, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * Who else? The anti-homosexual lobby? The bi-curious lobby? Some individual not associated with any lobby group at all? Stereotyping narrows the mind ;-) Onebyone 10:08, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * Keep. - SimonP 01:36, Oct 24, 2003 (UTC)
 * Delete. It is not NPOV to divide people up based on a single attribute like this.  Daniel Quinlan 01:43, Oct 24, 2003 (UTC)
 * Delete. -- Minesweeper 03:50, Oct 24, 2003 (UTC)
 * Delete. It has nothing to do with a pro- or anti-gay bias, but entirely with an attempt to stop the proliferation of nonsense lists.  RickK 04:01, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * Delete. We need to get a grip of this proliferation of useless lists. If these people are prominent for having done something, they should be listed for their accomplishments, not just for what they are. -- Arwel 11:29, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * Keep, though I think we need to make some effort towards consistency of terminology (Queer vs. Homosexual). Such lists may not be something you'd look up on their own but serve a useful cross-referencing function; those lists that are more useful will be more used -- it's a self-regulating thing. Jgm 12:13, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * Keep, though I'd prefer a different term. Hyacinth makes good arguments. -- Jake 14:58, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * Keep but move to List of Homosexual/ Bisexual... I think this could come in useful if a university student were doing a paper on the effect of Homosexuality on a gay artist's work. Alexandros 20:03, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)aplank
 * Delete. If you really want this sort of information, what's wrong with just searching for it?  That way you can construct all the searches and search combinations you want, without us having to have millions of lists that are always woefully out of date. --Delirium 03:09, Oct 25, 2003 (UTC)
 * Keep as queer (lower case, it's not a proper name) for those who self-identify as being in the broad queer category, until there's enought to warrant sub-category lists. These lists appear to have use as organizing tools, though without automated help keeping them up to date is a pain. JamesDay 10:51, 25 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * Keep! (I surprice myself by voting to keep a list.)--Ruhrjung 15:21, 25 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * Keep. --AaronSw 04:29, 26 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * Keep but rename. Queer is a popular term among radical elements of the gay community in the US but many gays in the US and most gays (including me) outside the US find the term queer makes us want to throw up. As 'queer' is a politically correct term still offensive to many, particularly outside the US, and we have a page called List of famous gay, lesbian or bisexual people, it should logically be called List of famous gay, lesbian or bisexual composers. FearÉIREANN 05:43, 26 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * Keep, but rename to List of famous gay, lesbian or bisexual composers, so that it can contain more info. --FallingInLoveWithPitoc 15:42, 26 Oct 2003 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate up to the point of deletion and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the new method of assessing voting, should be placed on other relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.