Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender sportspeople


 * 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 was keep. Krimpet (talk) 08:31, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

List of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender sportspeople

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

There is no significant relationship between how you play cricket and who you prefer to have sex with. Although some arguments may say that LGBT people in sports is taboo, this is not a good enough reason to keep this intersection. If there is evidence that a person HAS been discriminated against in their respective sport because they were LGBT, then there might be something to say. However, this applies to at most a handful of people and a list for those would be overkill. A category of sportspeople and a category for LGBT is more than enough for the individual articles. I have also nominated the category: Categories for discussion/Log/2007 May 22 Bulldog123 16:31, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Strongest possible keep - Given the low numbers of openly LGBT sportspeople and given the attention that it garners when a pro athlete comes out even years after his/her career is over and given the attitude prevalent in every level of sports competition, given the books written on the topic (including Jocks and Jocks 2 by Dan Woog and the biographies of such athletes as David Kopay, Greg Louganis, Billy Bean and others which discuss the impact of being LGBT in a sports environment) and given the existence of international sports festivals for LGBT athletes, the notability of this subject is unquestionable. There should also be a lead article on the topic of homosexuality in sport if there isn't one already. Characterizing sexual orientation as "who you prefer to have sex with" illustrates a fundamentally low level of critical understanding of human sexuality on the part of the nominator. Otto4711 18:05, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong keep - While the nominator is mostly correct that one's sexuality doesn't impact your ability in a sport, societal reactions to one's sexuality do impact one's mental health, one's ability to play, etc. And on the other side of the coin, LGBT readers do want to know LGBT sportspeople. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs)  20:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I also mentioned your second point. There is no evidence that for each of these people their LGBT nature affected absolutely ANYTHING. The lists purpose, as everyone puts it, asserts there is a relationship, and in some way that could be offensive to their player, singling them out for being LGBT when it likely has no relevance to their gameplay at all. Bulldog123 16:04, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of sexuality and gender-related deletions.   -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs)  20:35, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * STRONG KEEP Otto4711 hit it on the money.--Whstchy 03:44, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. We should ensure that all on the list are out (if alive) to avoid WP:BLP problems, but this is notable. I'm also concerned this may have be a WP:POINT nomination per nominator's comments on the AfD for List of Hindu Sportspeople. -- Charlene 04:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * If you really did read my comments then you'd know I was against WP:POINT nominations to appease WP:WAXers in that case. Bulldog123 16:04, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment The first entry on the list - Glenn Hunter - originally called him a cricketer (actually a 'cricket player') when he was actually a footballer. There's no mention on his individual page about his sexuality either.  A google search seems to turn up no hits indicating that he might be gay either, unless I'm searching for the wrong thing.  A list like this needs to be sourced well I think and thoroughly checked.  It's currently not sourced at all (except by default through links to the sports people's own pages) and, given the scope for malicious entries, I don't think that's good enough.  It's also missing a few notable names of people who come into this category and have clearly asserted what their sexuality is.  Perhaps some of the people voting 'strong keep' here might like to help me improve it? Nick mallory 04:08, 23 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep Per Above Rackabello 04:14, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep. At first I thought this was a non-notable union, like "List of redheaded Catholic pianists", but per User:SatyrTN and User:Otto4711, the union does seem notable after all. List just needs cleanup and reliable sources. Ten Pound Hammer  • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 04:20, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, a category would be more appropriate then a list. G1  gg  y  !  04:27, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - the nominator is also trying to get the category deleted. Otto4711 13:55, 23 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep per Otto4771. Of course, we definitely need to make sure to strongly source the list. Maxamegalon2000 05:15, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Create a category instead per G1  gg  y  ! 's recommendation. I also agree that any such list has great potential for harm, but that can be dealt with and is no reason not to create such a list, only to ensure that it is done properly. --Edwin Herdman 05:18, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep especially because LGBT sportspeople by sport categories keep getting deleted. It's nice to have a list of LGBT athletes and their sport in one place. Kolindigo 06:54, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep The fact that people have been attracted to write books about this particular intersection of topics makes it notable enough in my opinion. There are obviously issues that people in this situation face because of their combination of circumstances. If that weren't the case, it'd be deletable on the basis that sexual proclivities and sports do not form a natural intersection like, say, nationality and sports. Deranged bulbasaur 11:04, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment This nomination doesn't fit any of the criteria in WP:CSK. Deranged bulbasaur 11:09, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep When I saw this, my first reaction was God I hope this is sourced. And, what do you know? A list that is properly sourced and alphabetized. So, not only is it organized, but it adheres to BLP as well. It's the first list I've seen in a while that met those requirements, so I'll be damned if I don't support it (not that anyone else hasn't). Upon further review, it is sourced, but not as well as it should be. This is a dangerous topic in regards to WP:BLP as I'm sure Clay Aiken could attest to. All information regarding the people on the list needs to be verifed. I think the topic is important, but let's make sure everything is accurate. -- Cyrus      Andiron   13:40, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Thanks to a lot of work by User:Nick mallory, the entire list has been sourced and references organized. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 21:09, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Yes it indeed well sourced, now. -- Cyrus      Andiron   11:44, 24 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep or categorize. JJL 14:45, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I've noticed at least three users commenting on here have not read my nomination reasoning, because they all put "or categorize" or "a category would be better." As Otto mentioned, I have nominated the category too and mentioned this in my nomination reasoning. Unfortunately I think there might be a bit of mob mentality going on here because nobody is completing thinking about what type of assertions we're making by having a list of LGBT sportspeople. Being taboo or rare doesn't designate notability. People are misconstruing the books that were mentioned by OTTO. Most were memoirs or autobiographies and their subjects WERE NOT SOLELY BASED ON BEING LGBT IN SPORTS. White men in the NBA, taken as a whole, are a minority, and there certainly is some taboo-nature to being white on an all-Black team on the NBA but List of White NBA players would get deleted immediately. Bulldog123 16:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - Both of the books by Woog that I mentioned are solely based on being LGBT in sports. The biographies I mentioned all deal very extensively with the athletes' experiences being gay in professional sports. I'd be interested to know which of them you read before coming to your conclusion about their subject matters. I'm not sure what "assertions" you think we're making by having this list, other than that the people on it are LGBT, or why that is such a concern for you that you feel the need to nominate this list, the corresponding categories and additional LGBT by profession categories. Otto4711 17:20, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - it's not only LGBT categories that he/she's nominated, things like list of Hindo sports people and List of Catholic American entertainers have also been nominated... it just feels like an attempt to clean up lists he/she feels are unencyclopedic, not something directed at LGBT material. Sancho 17:24, 23 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Category would be better. It would be more manageable and additions to the category would have to be sourced on their individual article pages. Sancho 17:17, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong keep notable intersection means category kept and the list is of people primarily notable for being gay in sports. Carlossuarez46 00:34, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * keep notable--12345ka 23:32, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep one of few lists like this that is definitely worth keeping. this IS given as much media attention as many other celeberty gossip talks. I wouldn't go as far as having a list of celebrities who adopt foreign children but that also is a possible, very weak though, list. Feydakin 00:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep It's a list that puts notable people in a the same catogort togeather. It gives an easy access to someone who wants to do rescarch about these type of sports people. Besides allmost every one of them allready have a page about them on wikipedia. Watchdogb 21:50, 26 May 2007 (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.