Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of gay, lesbian or bisexual composers


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was keep. → Ξxtreme Unction {yak ł blah } 04:27, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

List of gay, lesbian or bisexual composers
WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of information. Another example of what should be a Category and not an Article Bob 20:09, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Why should it? Categories do not replace lists. Policy referred to is completely irrelevant imo. CalJW 20:23, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files. Wikipedia articles are not mere collections of external or internal links or Internet directories.--Bob 20:32, 22 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. The article is carefully sourced. Lists and categories complement each other. This does not appear to me to be "indiscriminate information." Nor is it a collection of links. -Willmcw 20:48, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * It is just a collection of links, nowhere do you state how being gay or whatever has had an effect on the music produced by the list of people.--Bob 17:33, 23 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep per above args. &mdash; RJH 23:40, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep but where's Walter/Wendy Carlos? Durova 23:55, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * keep - so add hir. ive added a few more obvious ones (Bob Mould, Tom Robinson, kd lang etc) BL   kiss the lizard  00:40, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment-Although I accepted its deletion at the time I hope that if this is kept then List of Catholic composers is kept as well. That said both lists should be referenced and verify the Catholicism or LGBT nature of their names.--T. Anthony 04:07, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * That's a false analogy if you're trying to apply it to my voting pattern. Sexual orientation is not equivalent to religion or ethnicity. See my talk page. Durova 10:00, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I wasn't referring to your vote, in least I don't think so. I don't keep track that well of who is voting for what. I'm talking in general to anyone that it does seem certain genetic predispositions or ways of living are more acceptable to list then others. I find this curious. Various religions have certainly faced discrimination. Added to that various other genetic predispositions have faced abuse. If it is a matter of being born a certain way mattering I'll spin off a list from the Osteogenesis imperfecta article. Still maybe I am being a bit too snotty.--T. Anthony 15:26, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I seem to recall reading somewhere that being religious has a genetic component. Voyager640 18:21, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Exactly T. Anthony. If a list on Catholic composers is to be deleted, then a list on gay composers should also be deleted. Shouldn't standards be the same throughout Wikipedia? Should gay lists and jewish lists be allowed yet white, catholic straight lists be deleted? --Bob 19:14, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Professional achievement that overcomes discrimination is legitimate grounds for inclusion. Carry your reasoning to its logical conclusion and and it would eliminate List of first black Major League Baseball players by team and date.  I'd vote to keep a List of Roman Catholic composers and musicians in England, 1550 - 1850.  I'd have no problem with List of Roman Catholic composers of liturgical works.  A generalized List of Catholic composers goes too far because there is no inherent relationship between Catholicism and secular music. Durova 04:07, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * "List of Roman Catholic composers and musicians in England, 1550 - 1850", would be an unreasonably long title. Also List of first black Major League Baseball players by team and date indicates why they are notable and that it isn't just for being black. By the logic your using I think List of first gay, lesbian or bisexual composers by symphony or orchestra would fit better.--T. Anthony 04:50, 24 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete if this article is kept, then logically a List of gay, lesbian or bisexual criminals would be acceptable. I do not think either is acceptable as being a composer and being LGBT are unrelated equally much as being LGBT and being a criminal are unrelated. --TimPope 21:48, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Are you referring to Category:LGBT criminals? :) -Silence 01:39, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Yep that should definitely go too! --TimPope 17:50, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Too bad, it just survived its VfD.. several days after List of Jewish criminals didn't. :P Consistency and Wiki go together like sex and fire ants in a henhouse on Wednesday afternoons, is whats Is always says. -Silence 18:27, 25 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep as before: Talk:List of Queer composers/delete. I am also not sure how being essentialist drivel would improve the list. If anything one strength of the list is that it indicates the diversity of musics produced by queer composers. Hyacinth 11:17, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete should we have List of straight composers as well? Seems rather pointless. How about List of gay, lesbian or bisexual Jews?  Grue   12:25, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
 * "List of straight composers" (or presumably straight composers) would be quite lengthy, but I see no reason why not to have one (except that with the shorter list of GLB composers one need simply compare to a complete list of composers), as with the shorter "List of gay, lesbian or bisexual Jewish people". Just because you do not find a piece of information, or an entire article personally useful does not seem a good reason to eliminate that information from Wikipedia. Hyacinth 12:32, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
 * As most people are straight that would be silly. (Hopefully no one will say "most people are Christians, but you voted for those lists", because most people are NOT Christians and never were) Although because of stereotypes I could almost see List of heterosexual men in musical theatre or maybe in nursing. Almost, well sort of in a way.--T. Anthony 17:19, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Actually List of male nurses could be closer to valid, although the only male I see on List of nurses is homosexual so limiting it to heterosexuals maybe wouldn't.--T. Anthony 17:22, 27 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep I'm new to Wikipedia and am not familiar with the traditions of article creation / deletion on this site. Still, as a queer classical musician, I can say without a doubt that such lists are useful in preserving queer cultural identity and act as a great starting point for further research. (jklein)
 * Strong delete who cares? StabRule 23:43, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. People care. -- JJay 17:45, 28 November 2005 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.