Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people: Si-Sz

List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people: Si-Sz
As on the "A", "T-V", and "W-Z" sections of this list (see the FLC discussions that passed: A, T-V, W-Z), I and WP:LGBT have completed working on "Si-Sz". There should not be any LGBT person with a Wikipedia article whose surname begins with Si-Sz that isn't on here, though of course articles are being added all the time. Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 14:46, 11 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Neutral I'm starting to have second thoughts about the fact these lists seem to prominently showcast our systemic bias. Look at it: there are exactly 6 non-english-speaking people on this 70-so people segment! I'm having serious doubt as to the representativity of the list when you look at the alternative language lists (though admittedly it might have more to do with the absence of these articles on en:). One extra candidate might be Suzy Solidor. Circeus 03:23, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: Thanks, Circeus - I've added Solidor (and added a bit to her article). I'm not sure what to do with the US-centric issue, though.  This section isn't very representative of world-wide culture, but I'm almost ready to nominate Sa-Sh, where there are something like 25-30 non-English speaking people listed out of ~100. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs)  05:50, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * You could have a quick look at the nl: list, which has 10+ people in that span (though as I mentioned one of them do have en: articles, although some from Sa-Sh do). Circeus 23:43, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I've added Lucius Cornelius Sulla to the list. Socrates is another possibility, but his article (on en) has been stripped of any mention of his sexuality. The other two possibilities in this alphabet range (Patti Smith and Barbara Stanwyck) are rumors at best. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs)  14:53, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Support, subject to one required confirmation. It's great that this list, unlike some of the earlier ones, has a wide range of sources (the As seemed to rely much too heavily on glbtq.com). But have all of the sources actually been checked? For example, where the main source is only available offline (e.g. Edith Simcox), has someone actually got hold of a copy of the book and confirmed that it does make the required claims? Or is there any danger that, for example, a website (which may not qualify as a Reliable Source in its own right) references a book and that book has then been treated here as the source, rather than the website? --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 10:53, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Reply: I can't guarantee all of the entries, but I'm reasonably certain all of them are verified. I do know that the entries I added have been checked. Google Books is my friend :) -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs)  16:35, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Cool, that's good enough for me. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 08:49, 23 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Support. LuciferMorgan 13:43, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Looks good. -- Scorpion0422 00:43, 28 October 2007 (UTC)