Talk:List of dramatic television series with LGBT characters: 2020s/Archive 1

Archive 1

Contested deletion: this is the 3rd list in a series of related lists.

This page should not be speedily deleted because... this new list is the third in a series of related lists. The first one is List of dramatic television series with LGBT characters: 1970s–2000s, the second one is List of dramatic television series with LGBT characters: 2010s. This list is for the 2020s series. --Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 04:48, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes I changed my mind and voted keep in the deletion discussion. TomCat4680 (talk) 13:45, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

The comment was a formal reply suggested by initial message announcing the request for deletion. Thereafter, all comments for/against were held in the discussion. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 03:09, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

why are these two unrelated things in the See also section?

Why are there links to 2021 in American television#Programs debuting in 2021 and 2022 in American television in the "See also" section? Those have nothing to do with LGBT characters, there nothing listed there. I tried to remove it but was reverted [1] so discussing it here. Dream Focus 10:13, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

I explained it in the deletion discussion and wrote a hidden note next to them. They're to help people find more examples to add to the list (which so far only has one item). TomCat4680 (talk) 13:45, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

These lists about future programs can confuse inexperienced editors. We do not add series to the table based on prediction and forecast. Even if some sources provide information about a series and/or character before a show has premiered, what is actually seen or heard in episodes can contradict what the sources anticipated. If a series has not premiered it is not added to the table. And describing a character as LGBT/+ needs to be verified with reliable sources. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 05:47, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Sockpuppets

This is just an advisory regarding sock puppetry for uninformed editors:  if sockpuppets are created to edit this list and press a POV, please be aware that editing patterns and history are among the factors used in determining multiple accounts created for editing a particular subject. Consequently, a CU may be initiated. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 03:58, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Suggestions for improvement

If so all of the shows on this page list 2020 as a start date, why not organize it by character debut date? It could help. Also, someone needs to go through and source this stuff. I did a lot of work on the pages branching off List of animated series with LGBT characters, so that's a possible model for improvement. This information needs to be presented and preserved, but without sources, it can easily be dismissed by some people who hate more LGBTQ representation as happenstance, which is BAD.--Historyday01 (talk) 18:30, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

For starters, most of the entries have sources to support their inclusion and the character descriptions. Second, you think the list should be organized by the "character debut date" instead of the year of a series premiere? Many, if not most, of the LGBT+ characters in television series are not main and recurring; keeping track of what broadcast date the myriad of characters first appeared is crazy. There are British series, Canadian series, Australian series, U.S. series, European series, etc., with air dates that are different when they're broadcasted by non-original networks. Most of Netflix's international series, for example, are acquired distributions and not Netflix-made productions. Series that are aired concurrently by two separate broadcasters are uncommon.
The fact that editors add LGBT+ characters to the list acknowledges their existence in the series and preserves this information. What too many editors fail to do is provide reliable sources when they contribute their good faith edits -- that's when those of us who are conscientious about the importance of including RS step in and do it whenever we can.
On a different note, I saw that you have two user accounts: User:Historyday01 and User:Historyhermann1993. However, you have not identified them as being alternative accounts of the same individual. Per WP:MULTIPLE: "It is recommended that multiple accounts be identified as such on their user pages; templates such as {{User alternative account}} or one of a selection of user boxes may be used for this purpose...multiple accounts may not be used to comment on proposals or requests...."
The gist of your post (30 March 2020) is very similar in nature to the post created (on 30 March 2020) in the comedy list talk page by another User with "hist" in their account name.
Therefore, in accordance with the Username policy: do you have more than the two above-referenced Wikipedia accounts? And if you do, please provide them. I'm sure you will understand why being vigilant about sock puppetry is important for members of Wikipedia's community. Thank you. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 09:36, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Your comment here is similar to what you posted elsewhere. I addressed most of what you said there already, so I don't want to repeat myself here. I'd be completely fine with following the same model you purposed you proposed there, by show debut date.Historyday01 (talk) 13:13, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

For the record, this is my response to your "needs a lot of work" comment in the 1970s–2000s list talk page. Editors can see it for themselves. This is the response to your "layout suggestion" comment in the 2010s list talk page. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 07:08, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

This back and forth is doing no one any good. You can link to all those comments all you want, but it doesn't change what I said on your talk page. I'm not working with anymore for a format on this page. You can wallow in the despair of this badly sourced and poorly organized page. As I said on the talk page, I'm willing to make minor edits, like adding sources, but that's all I'm doing because I'll never get any agreement from you, as you pick at every little thing. No wonder there are others on your talk page who think the same.Historyday01 (talk) 19:48, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

"This back and forth is doing no one any good." And you can't seem to listen to yourself.
Contrary to your harping regarding these lists ("currently a mess", "is a damn mess"), this list is not a "badly sourced and poorly organized page".
As far as sources go, not all LGBT+ characters in television series receive media coverage; and since wikis, fan blogs, fan websites, and most user generated sources cannot be used, sometimes the only way a character can be sourced is by naming the episode they first appeared in. Good faith editors who are not frequent Wikipedia editors also don't necessarily know why adding reliable sources is important.
Anyone can see what has transpired on my talk page, while you on the other hand delete inconvenient comments from yours.
"You can wallow in the despair". The histrionic drama is yours alone to wallow in. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 04:43, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Sigh. I stand by what I said, as I still feel that the List of dramatic television series with LGBT characters: 1970s–2000s page is a mess, as is the List of comedy television series with LGBT characters page, because neither are organized relatively well. That's what I mean by saying they are a mess. I wouldn't say the pages I've edited are organized in the best way either. Anything, I feel, would be better than the current organization of this page, the 1970s-2000s one, the 2010s one, and the one on comedy TV series, all of which are organized by dates the show ran, which can be a bit arbitrary, since the characters themselves may have not premiered in the first episode. For example, Marceline in Adventure Time premiered in the show's 12th episode, Evicted!, which showed on Cartoon Network on May 17, 2010, but the show itself aired its first episode ("Slumber Party Picnic") on April 5, 2010. I would argue that it would be better to use the character debut date in that instance. Additionally, the current format results in possible duplication. I recognize that organizing characters by debut date can lead to duplication as well, in terms of multiple entries for the same show, but it seems to make more sense, as individuals can see all the bisexual characters from x year to x year, all the lesbian characters in a certain time frame, etc... In terms of your other comments, I recognize (and am fully aware) that not all LGBT+ characters receive media coverage and that citing episodes is sometimes the only way to cite those characters. Even so, I still think the sourcing on this page is not great. I felt the same way about the pages I edited about animated LGBTQ characters, which were badly sourced before I went through the effort to add sources, which is an ongoing project. I have every right to delete comments from my talk page, as it is my talk page, just as you have every right to delete comments from your talk page. If you deleted my comments on your talk page, I wouldn't care in the slightest. Have fun organizing the page on your own. I'm sure you'll find some other people who are more receptive to the idea than myself. I wouldn't call this "histrionic drama" to be honest, as I just see you as yet another annoying person online. That's it. End of story. I really don't want to waste my time responding to you, but at the same time, I think its worthwhile to set the record straight.Historyday01 (talk) 16:57, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

As I responded to your comment in the List of comedy television series with LGBT characters talk page: a "character debut date" (i.e. when a character first appears in a series) needs to be supported with reliable sourcing.
A series premiere date, on the other hand, is verified in the Wikipedia article for the series, and in the instances where there is no article a source can be found to verify the premiere date.
I proposed in that same reply to have "series listed by alphabetical order (A-Z) within their year of debut" as a sensible improvement.
As I said about the comedy list: the title of this list is dramatic television series with LGBT characters -- the significance is the series that include LGBT+ characters.
Having one, single row for Year–Show–Network–Character–Actor–Notes (for description of characters and citations) keeps the list visually uncluttered and avoids bloating the page. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 04:31, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Well, good. A series premiere date can be ok, its just that it can get a little clunky if all the series premiere in 2020, like in this page. But if the clunkiness is ok with you, then that's fine, I guess. I don't have the energy to debate this anymore right now, so I'll just let you go on your merry way. I have my own pages to edit and update, anyhow, as do you, with specific pages you contribute to, and that's fine.Historyday01 (talk) 18:16, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Why is this going by alphabetical order and not when it came out.

This 2020 gay characters is wrong you should have put in together by when it came out not alphabetical order just like the other ones Qikianali (talk) 03:21, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Not a bad idea, but I think Pyxis Solitary will probably have something to say on this. --Historyday01 (talk) 03:34, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Since you're new to the list, you weren't introduced to it when it was an unorganized mess with no rhyme or reason.
(1) You've made an assumption about it that needs to be corrected: it is not a list about "gay characters" -- it is a list about Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender characters. For the sake of not offending queer advocacy non-binary, pansexual, asexual, and graysexual identities became included.
(2) You've also made another assumption that needs to be corrected: the assumption that the characters come first; however, the list is about the dramatic series that include non-heterosexual characters.
(3) "just like the other ones" is an incorrect description: all the dramatic series lists are organized by the following chronological order: (a) decade series premiered [section] (b) year of series premiere [first column], (c) title of series in alphabetical order [second column], with all the LGBT characters found in a series listed in the Notes column along with the verifiable sources that support why the series is included in the list. Since the series are organized by their decade + year of premiere: they are organized by when they "came out".
If all you're interested in is characters, the List of LGBT characters in television and radio exists for the purpose of putting the emphasis solely on the characters.
The persistent problems that existed with the editing of this and the other dramatic series lists were reduced about 90% when the list was reorganized into the easy-to-figure-out format it is now. Nowadays, when there is an edit problem made it is because (a) an editor doesn't bother to review the table's wiki code format [which is visible in Source], (b) an editor ignores the hidden instructions that appear when you open both the Source and Visual edit screens, (c) an editor has a poor grasp of English grammar and composition, (d) an editor fails to add verifiable sources, (e) an editor uses VisualEditor, which is unaware of table formatting done by templates, and therefore not compatible for editing tables correctly.
Unlike other lists that can confuse the general public when they first look at it, and that can be unnecessarily long, the dramatic lists are tight, simple, and easy to decipher. Reader Q: Does the new 2020 dramatic Series X include any LGBT characters? Wikipedia A: Here's the list and all you have to do is look for the series name by its alphabetical order. 1-2-3. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 00:14, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

The other list are not confusing they are in chronological order. It’s just not presentable to have two out of three of the lost to be in chronological order and the third alphabetical. Qikianali (talk) 05:27, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

"two out of three of the lost". I have no idea what you're saying. In any event, the three dramatic series lists are the same format. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 12:38, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Accessibility

This list article is not compliant with WP:ACCESS, which makes it impossible for our visually impaired readers to access. The format of the tables in the year defined sections use <br /> tags to emulate a visual row, which is not recommended. This is a significant problem for users of screen readers which read tables, cell by cell, HTML row by HTML row, not visual row by visual row. Isaidnoway (talk) 14:03, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for noting this. Well, I removed all the br tags. I went through even more list pages today and updated them, too, to remove br tags. I almost think there should be some task force that just focuses on br tags or something, because I'd imagine a lot of articles out there are not compliant with WP:ACCESS. --Historyday01 (talk) 17:22, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

@Historyday01: - Thanks for the effort, but slash marks in cells separating the names are not accessibility compliant either, and if you updated the other articles with slash marks, they are still not accessibility compliant as well. The information has to be presented in a logical structure for our impaired readers to comprehend. They need to be able to understand what character is portrayed by what actor and a specific description for that character. When you put all the characters names in one cell, the screen reader (SR) will read all the names at once in that cell very fast, but now with a slash mark. Then when the SR gets to the next cell, it reads all the actors names in that cell at once very fast, again with a slash mark. That is not logical structure. Each individual row should be presented in this format — characters name in one cell → actors name in one cell → characters description in one cell. The accessibility problem arises where some of these TV shows have multiple characters and actors, and when their names are read out loud very fast, how are you supposed to be able to comprehend which actor goes with what character? If you haven't looked yet, go to my user page and listen for yourself to get a clearer understanding. And FYI, sentences end with a period, so the SR recognizes that (and commas too) and pauses, and then reads the next sentence, so slash marks do nothing for comprehension. Isaidnoway (talk) 18:45, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Hmm. Sigh. I would think that many people aren't working on this at all. I imagine that rowspan would be compliant though. Historyday01 (talk) 21:42, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Anyway, @ Isaidnoway (talk), I just updated the whole page with painstaking effort to get rid of all those accursed slashes. It should be easier on the other pages I created as they aren't as monstrous as this one. Historyday01 (talk) 00:57, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Make the list comply with WP:ACCESS. Fine. No problem. But everything contained in this list, as with others, exists because someone cared enough to add it. So while you're making the table easier for visually impaired readers ... don't also delete characters from it. And don't sprinkle it with decoration because you personally believe that one series is more significant and should stand out from the rest. And if a series needs RS ... find it and add it to the row. Bold editing does not mean shitting on the contributions of everyone who made this and other lists possible. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 08:20, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps maybe you should take a moment to actually read WP:ACCESS - "While this is primarily intended to assist those with disabilities, it can be helpful to all readers". If I do delete a character, it's because it doesn't meet the criteria, or I can't find a source to verify, or it's by accident, so I'd kindly ask you to assume good faith as to why a character was deleted, and if you think it should be put back, then by all means, find a source and restore it. Good lord, it's not the end of the world, and I really don't appreciate you implying that I am shitting on the contributions of others. And you are the one who complained about the table looking cluttered and messy and hard to read, so if a show has 20+ characters, that is significant, so highlighting that show so it is easier to read for all readers, is not just pretty decorations, it's called easier accessibility to information, and furthermore, when a "See also" link is added to a show that has a specific article for list of characters, that's called a convenience link, kind of like those clusterfuck of links at the top of all these articles, that belong in the "See also" section. And if a series needs RS ... find it and add it, is good advice, I've added over 1000+ references in the last couple of months to these LGBT related articles. Isaidnoway (talk) 12:13, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

"so I'd kindly ask you to assume good faith as to why a character was deleted". You only get one chance to pull the "good faith" card. So that everyone reading my comment understands why I say this:
Talk:List of dramatic television series with LGBT characters: 1960s–2000s#Deleting characters without explanation (04:36, 7 March 2021).
You deleted a character from a series. I asked why it was deleted. No reply. I restored the character two days later (13:44, 9 March 2021).
You're not obligated to respond to another editor's inquiry about your editing, but if you're going to play by your own rules you need to get off your soapbox. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 13:35, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Unsourced entries can be re-added when they have sources. Historyday01 (talk) 14:52, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't regularly check that talk page. And you are muted from my notifications, so I don't receive pings from you. You can find the mute function under the "Notifications" tab of user preferences. Isaidnoway (talk) 16:13, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Deleting series

It's one thing to edit the table to make it more accessible -- but its quite another to start deleting series from the list. Everything in these types of lists depends on someone seeing LGBT characters in a series and adding the series to the list. Series, miniseries, and TV movies are often added right after the premiere because that's when someone watched them; but finding RS that includes mention of an LGBT character in a just-released program often happens after some time has passed.
It's a Sin is a miniseries about the beginning of the AIDS crisis in the UK. It has gay characters as main characters. The series was added with a brief description of the plot and RS confirming what the series was about -- yet this series was deleted from the list. This kind of reckless editing is detrimental to Wikipedia and the purpose of these lists. The last thing this community needs is careless editors that trample on the reason why these lists were created and cause more harm than good. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 08:07, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

No. Verifiability is policy and removing content that is not verifiable is not careless and reckless editing. Wikipedia does not publish original research. Even if you are sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it. Everything in these types of lists depends on someone seeing LGBT characters in a series and adding the series to the list. - that's great, but it also must be supported by a reliable source to verify the information, that's policy. There is no deadline on Wikipedia for adding information, we wait for the sources to be published, we are not a newspaper. Editors who see a new show with LGBT characters are more than welcome to add it to the talk page as a helpful reminder that when reliable sources verify the information, it can be added, and the same can be said if it is removed from the article, move it to the talk page. Isaidnoway (talk) 12:35, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

"There is no deadline on Wikipedia for adding information". That's right. And it's why the {{citation needed}} template was created. We all need to accept that some series do not receive the same media coverage as others, but this does not in and of itself negate the existence of LGBT characters in them. The throwing away of information because you can't dot all the "i's" and cross all the "t's" is ultimately detrimental. There are many grey areas when it comes to coverage of LGBT subjects and we should not be complicit in the erasure of LGBT history in television. When the mention of an LGBT character is difficult to find in a publication, the episode(s) they appear in can also be a source: WP:SOURCE > "The work itself" (and to state the obvious, just like a piece of music is a published source, an episode is a published source: definition of "publish"). I predict that the deletion of series from these lists is going to wind up in a noticeboard. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 13:10, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

I see your point and I'd be totally fine with the entries being re-added as long as they have reliable sources. Pyxis Solitary, if you are that concerned about the series, feel free to re-add it. I personally don't think the removal of one series is a big deal, as there are SO MANY entries on this page that don't have sources... and I didn't remove any of those and I wouldn't, at this point. Wikipedia is fluid, stuff can be added, subtracted, and expanded from time to time. As an addendum to this comment, Pyxis Solitary, thanks for adding those sources in for the shows, which is why I thanked you for your recent edits. I only removed the entry (and a few others) because, from my perspective, it had no sources, and it made sense to remove the show, at that present time. Even so, I still agree with the argument of Isaidnoway, generally, when it comes to adding information which has reliable sources to support it. Historyday01 (talk) 16:01, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

We all need to accept that some series do not receive the same media coverage as others - Are you fucking kidding me right now? Did you not see up above where I clearly stated I've added 1000+ references? Do you know how hard it was to find online sources for some of those obscure series, a one time guest appearance that received no coverage, old shows from the 60s, 70s, 80s, foreign language series, translating sources? Apparently not. I've checked out books and magazines from the library. I've used {{cite episode}}, several times for a hard to find reference, sometimes scouring YouTube for episodes. I've even gone so far as to go to a friends house and use their streaming service to watch an episode to get a reference (of course I had to bring takeout). I don't have a subscription to every single streaming/web service out there, so how about asking (or teaching) the editor(s) who have watched a show, and added an unsourced entry, how to properly cite their entry to the list, because I do know how. And I don't think you're going to find anyone that will refute that WP:V is policy, and we are not on a deadline, at any noticeboard. How dare you imply that I'm being complicit in the erasure of LGBT history in television, after all the time and energy I've put into sourcing these LGBT articles. Isaidnoway (talk) 17:06, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Isaidnoway, you make a good point here. There are some series where it is very hard, if not impossible, to find sources for because they are so, so obscure. I'm glad Isaidnoway, that you showed me about LezWatch.TV, as that is a place of last resort if I really can't find a source anywhere else. Like you, I don't have a subscription to every streaming service (currently only Hulu, Netflix, and Peacock, the latter until July). I've put a lot of energy into sourcing the articles too and its hard work! People add unsourced entries to LGBTQ pages all the time. If they do, I usually just revert their edit one time and ask them to provide a reliable source. Similarly, for all the work I've put into these pages, it is absurd to say I'm "complicit in the erasure of LGBT history in television" either. Again, there is definitely no deadline to add sources, as they can be added anytime. My record of working on LGBTQ pages speaks for itself as well, as Pyxis knows well. Historyday01 (talk) 17:30, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

LezWatch is a good reference for female characters, so is LGBT Fans Deserve Better and Autostraddle. Bi.org is decent for bisexual characters. You can also find old editions of the magazines Advocate and Out at Google Books. You can also search YouTube for episodes (it's really helpful to have the episode name), and use the cite episode template, of course you have to watch the full episode, and it's also super helpful to include the time in the episode that supports the info, for easier verification for readers and editors. Book sources include (really good for guest appearances, obscure series, old series, animation): Becker (up until 2006), Capsuto (up until 2000), Cortese (up until 2006), Walters (up until 2001), and Tropiano (up until 2002). There's another book from 2018, the name fails me now, I found it on Google Books, but it has limited preview. Of course there is also GLAAD. I've also used wiki/fandom sites and IMDb (never in an article), but for research to help find a reliable source, because sometimes editors will add shows with just a characters first name, or "unknown" for the actor, and quite frequently, they will add (A characters name) is____, so you have to figure out their orientation. I actually found a source (foreign language) just today for a foreign series that describes a characters orientation as demisexual, I had to look it up to verify that it was a real thing, dummy me I guess for not knowing. Anyway, thanks for helping with the accessibility issues and adding sources where you can. I do appreciate it, and so do our readers and editors. Isaidnoway (talk) 18:42, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Sure, its my pleasure to address the accessibility issues. Thanks for sharing those sources, I'll definitely use those in the future as needed. I just updated all the list of animated series with LGBTQ characters pages today to get rid of all the slashes, so that's good. There are a couple more pages (that I dumbly added slashes too) I still need to fix, but I've got most of them, so far. I'm always finding new series all the time too and I have a bunch of Google Alerts too, so if any articles come up, that's good, like this Vanity Fair piece. I know it can't used to say Raya, in that new Disney film with her (Raya and the Last Dragon), is a lesbian (as her VA, Kelly Marie Tran has said), obviously, but I found the discussion of previous LGBTQ characters in Legend of Korra, Steven Universe, Adventure Time, She-Ra, and The Owl House more interesting. So, I get articles like those, occassionally, in my inbox and try and incorporate them, if possible, into articles. Historyday01 (talk) 18:59, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

I also agree with Pyxis that series shouldn't be removed for not having sources or for not stating characters identities. The (A characters name) is____ description is used because characters are not always labelled and, like in real life, a label shouldn't be assumed or guessed. As for the lack of sources, I always try to add a source when I update the list but, as you said, that isn't always possible. I, like many others, use this list to find representation in media and would be incredibly disappointed if we stopped including things over this. We acknowledge that the show needs a source which can always be added at a later date, but it is much more helpful to include them until then. LunaLovegoods (talk) 19:20, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

You should always make a good-faith attempt at looking for sources. And if it's a show you watched, as mentioned above, use the {{cite episode}} template, you can find all the information you need to fill it out from the credits on the show, it's real easy to fill out. Here is an example of one being used in this article - <ref>{{Cite episode|series=Genera+ion|title=Toasted|series-link=Generation (2021 TV series)|network=[[HBO Max]]|date=March 11, 2021|season=1|number=3|last1=Barnz|first1=Daniel|last2=Barnz|first2=Zelda|author-link=Daniel Barnz|minutes=11:58}}</ref>, I got all that information just by watching the show and the credits. If it's not possible for you to add a source, then add the series and/or character here to the talk page, with as much information you know about the series and/or character, and a volunteer editor can assist. You can also use Template:Request edit here on the talk page for a faster response. It's also important to remember that although this list is about fictional characters, there is also a real living persons name (the actor) attached to the character, so it has to be verifiable. Isaidnoway (talk) 20:09, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

I agree with Isaidnoway on this, 100%. On pages I edit more frequently than this, I usually revert someone's addition of characters in a series and say something like "could you please add a reliable source for that?" Here's my most recent example of that. As for these entries, since they are on the page and there are the number of LGBTQ publications out there (and people writing about it in other publications), it usually shouldn't a problem to find sources for this information. LunaLovegoods, I would say that that series SHOULD "be removed for not having sources or for not stating characters identities." We only want verified entries on here, not some unsourced stuff, which always seems to remain on big list pages like this. I say that while acknowledging what Isaidnoway says, that there should be a good faith effort to find sources. Also, the fact there were unsourced entries is, in part, why the List of media portrayals of bisexuality page was nominated for deletion.Historyday01 (talk) 20:21, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

"there is also a real living persons name (the actor) attached to the character, so it has to be verifiable." The purpose of the "Biographies of living persons" policy, as clearly stated in it, is to ensure that "biographies of living persons [are] written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy." Can you link to the section in WP:LIVE that states information about a fictional character played by an actor is regulated by "Biographies of living persons" guidelines. Also, actors die. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 09:36, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation...this applies whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable and whether it is in a biography or in some other article. These list articles are defined as some other article, and if the content is unsourced, then it's questionable that living actor portrayed that character in that show, until such time that a source is added. During the course of searching for and adding references for all these cn tags, I've found characters with the wrong living actor being named as the person who supposedly portrayed that character, wikilinked names of living people that supposedly portrayed a character, that are not even actors, and have also read sources about actors leaving a show because they objected and/or were offended to LGBT content in a show. I presumed (please correct me if I'm wrong) that you were the one who added the hidden comment about WP:NOR in every section of some of these articles, so I also presumed that you didn't want editors conducting original research (which is likely to be challenged, as evidenced by the amount of cn tags you have added), and adding content that is presumed to be questionable, because it hasn't been verified. I just think we need to get it right, don't you? Isaidnoway (talk) 14:42, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Yup on the WP:NOR. I am a proponent of following the rules. But I also know that IGNORE exists for a reason. And I am aware that LGBT-related subjects often fall into a gray area. When the LGBT is a main or recurring character in the series there's a greater chance that somewhere there will be a source that mentions the character. But I'm also aware that many television programs don't receive media attention, or very little if at all. There's also no guarantee that a webpage will remain live and accessible, and if it doesn't that it was archived before expiring. If an actor playing an LGBT character is a main or recurring actor, the name will be included in the WP article for the series (if it exists). I don't think that saying Actor A played the role of a gay man in this or that TV series is going to trigger the "contentious material" issue, nor wind up at WP:BLP/Noticeboard. However, this peculiar concern can be discussed and clarified in WT:BLP. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 12:55, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Add Welcome to Eden

source: https://youtu. be/U_YLx4pmHcw (remove the space before "be")  Rafael Ronen  02:54, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

The upshaws netflix 2021

Bernard is gay 92.233.62.194 (talk) 22:20, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Dead Boys Detectives is missing

I just want to say that this new show has queer characters. Have a good day! 161.116.133.31 (talk) 11:56, 30 April 2024 (UTC)