Talk:Aromanticism: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Aromanticism/Archive 1) (bot |
|||
(63 intermediate revisions by 23 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Talk header}} |
|||
{{Old AfD multi |date=18 March 2018 |result='''no consensus''' |page=Aromanticism}} |
{{Old AfD multi |date=18 March 2018 |result='''no consensus''' |page=Aromanticism}} |
||
{{WikiProject banner shell |class=c|1= |
|||
This article needs to stay. Its a decent beginning for the subject and we can build it over time. As it is the discourse on Aromantism is limited. |
|||
{{WikiProject LGBT studies }} |
|||
{{WikiProject Sexology and sexuality|importance=high}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Sociology|importance=}} |
|||
{{Wiki Loves Pride talk|2023}} |
|||
}} |
|||
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|||
|maxarchivesize = 150K |
|||
|counter = 1 |
|||
|minthreadsleft = 2 |
|||
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|||
|algo = old(60d) |
|||
|archive = Talk:Aromanticism/Archive %(counter)d |
|||
}} |
|||
== Confusion? == |
|||
== RfC: Should this article be merged? == |
|||
@[[User:Biohistorian15|Biohistorian15]], please discuss what you find [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Aromanticism&oldid=1224315500 confusing] as the section seems pretty clear - it lists a series of romantic identities that fall under the aromantic spectrum umbrella. [[User:Raladic|Raladic]] ([[User talk:Raladic|talk]]) 16:52, 17 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{{rfc|media|soc|rfcid=72B55CE}} |
|||
This page previously redirected to a section in the [[Asexuality]] article. It just went through [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aromanticism|an AfD]], which I somehow overlooked even though this page was on my watchlist during that time. The AfD closed as no consensus. Two argued for keeping the article while the others argued for redirecting and/or merging the article. The options for the merge were the Asexuality or the [[Romantic orientation]] article. So should this article be redirected and/or merged? [[User:Flyer22 Reborn|Flyer22 Reborn]] ([[User talk:Flyer22 Reborn|talk]]) 10:36, 11 April 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== |
== Squish == |
||
*'''Yes'''. Anyone who is familiar with the asexuality literature knows that aromanticism doesn't <s>really</s> widely exist outside of that topic/community. <s>Not truly.</s> This is also reflected by the sources in this article. It's the same for romantic orientation, even though it currently has its own Wikipedia article. Either way, this is [[WP:No page|not a case where a standalone page is needed]]. This topic should be covered in one of the two aforementioned articles<s>, preferably the Asexuality article.</s> [[User:Flyer22 Reborn|Flyer22 Reborn]] ([[User talk:Flyer22 Reborn|talk]]) 10:39, 11 April 2018 (UTC) |
|||
*<s>'''Yes''' I am not involved in the topics of the article, but purely from a practical standpoint, currently there is not enough substance in the page to merit its own article. I can't give a qualified opinion on the article to be merged to, but definitely one of the two. Not objected to keeping if '''substantial''' expansion occurs. [[User:Eddie891|Eddie891]] <small>''<sup> [[User talk:Eddie891|Talk]]</sup> <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Eddie891|Work]]</sub>'' </small> 11:12, 11 April 2018 (UTC)</s> |
|||
**Not an expert, so not voting, but recent expansion makes a merge impractical unless someone convinces me otherwise. [[User:Eddie891|Eddie891]] <small>''<sup> [[User talk:Eddie891|Talk]]</sup> <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Eddie891|Work]]</sub>'' </small> 15:25, 11 April 2018 (UTC) |
|||
*'''No'''. I have expanded the article, and I think it looks fine now. [[Special:Contributions/79.67.81.118|79.67.81.118]] ([[User talk:79.67.81.118|talk]]) 14:16, 11 April 2018 (UTC) |
|||
*Not a topic matter expert, but I think that after the expansion there is a bit too much content to reasonably merge. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Sandstein|<span style="color:white;background:blue;font-family:sans-serif;">''' Sandstein '''</span>]]</span></small> 14:59, 11 April 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::[[User:Eddie891|Eddie891]] and [[User:Sandstein|Sandstein]], the IP's expansion of the article is an attempt to make the topic look more notable than it is. Given its ties to asexuality and romantic orientation and that what is stated about it so commonly applies to asexual people as well, it's not much of a standalone topic. Look at the sources (many of which are poor for this topic) the IP-hopper included. Just about all of the sources the IP-hopper included define this identity within the concept of asexuality, just like [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Asexuality&oldid=835606227#Definition,_identity_and_relationships all of the other asexual identities]. I had to make [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Aromanticism&diff=835957348&oldid=835913123 this] edit just to remove [[WP:Undue weight]] based on an opinion piece and poor blog source and the IP pushing aromanticism as distinct from asexuality. Yes, they don't always mean the same thing and there are some people who identify as aromantic without identifying as asexual, but, for the most part, "aromantic" is defined within the asexuality community and is specifically noted by numerous reliable sources as being an asexual identity. That is why [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Aromanticism&diff=835959506&oldid=835957348 this "Community" content] that I just removed is based entirely on asexuality sources. For that content, the IP focused on the aromanticism identity aspect and made it seem like the sources are talking solely about the aromantic identity. They aren't. All of what the IP added for that section '''applies to asexuals as a whole.''' Even the "underrepresentation of aromantics in the media and in research" piece in the article by the IP is associated with asexuals, as seen by the sources used for it [https://www.themarysue.com/pop-culture-denies-aro-ace/ here] and [https://www.refinery29.uk/2016/06/113484/what-is-asexual-definition-experiences here]; they are about the asexual community in general. The latter source is very clear that '''aromanticism is on the asexuality spectrum'''. So far, the IP-hopper has added poor media sources (a few okay ones), WP:Undue weight, and has engaged in selective editing, [[WP:Editorializing]] and [[WP:Synthesis]] to try and save this article. The IP-hopper, who is no newbie, has done this before with other pages. And this includes the [[demisexuality]] topic, as seen at [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Demisexuality&oldid=818368812#Should_the_Demisexuality_article_be_merged_into_the_Gray_asexuality_article? that (now closed) merge discussion], where [[User:Atsme|Atsme]], [[User:Ozzie10aaaa|Ozzie10aaaa]], [[User:KateWishing|KateWishing]], [[User:CityOfSilver|CityOfSilver]], [[User:Comatmebro|Comatmebro]] and [[User:HelpTheBear|HelpTheBear]] weighed in. Do see the list of scholarly sources I listed in the collapse box below making it clear that aromanticism emerged from the asexuality community and/or is an asexual identity. |
|||
{{collapse top|title=Some sources on aromanticism/aromantic emerging from the asexuality community and/or being an asexual identity}} |
|||
*[https://books.google.com/books?id=Q0KDCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA46 This] 2015 "Asexuality and Sexual Normativity: An Anthology" source, from [[Routledge]], page 46, states, "''Interestingly, '''educational materials produced by asexuals have highlighted this feature thus generating a number of 'new' identities such as demisexual, aromantic asexual, biromantic asexual, and gray-A'''. Asexual 'language' or 'vocabulary' is another dimension that medical scales tend to overlook.''" |
|||
*[https://books.google.com/books?id=UWtECwAAQBAJ&pg=PT222 This] 2015 "Gender and the Modern Sherlock Holmes: Essays on Film and Television Adaptations Since 2009" source, from [[McFarland & Company|McFarland]], page 222, when speaking of asexuality research, states, "'''''This distinction between the sexual and the romantic appears to be featured prominently in the selfproduced asexual materials''', discourses, and discussions that selfidentified asexual people are likely to have encountered. '''It is in this context where identity labels such as demisexual, hyposexual, romantic, and aromantic asexual, hyporomantic, straightA, gay A, biA, gray A, etc. take on meanings''', as people attempt to position themselves not only according to the genders of people to whom they experience attraction, but also according to the degrees to which (and the ways in which) they do so.''" |
|||
*[https://books.google.com/books?id=naItCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA21 This] 2015 "Gender and Sexual Diversity in U.S. Higher Education: Contexts and Opportunities for LGBTQ College Students: New Directions for Student Services, Number 152" source, from [[John Wiley & Sons]], page 21, states, "'''''Various terms exist to describe asexual people's romantic inclinations, such as aromantic (do not experience romantic attractions)''', heteroromantic (romantically inclined toward people of a different sex/gender), homoromantic, biromantic, panromantic, and so on.''" |
|||
*[https://books.google.com/books?id=736zDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA92 This] 2016 "The SAGE Encyclopedia of LGBTQ Studies" source, from [[SAGE Publications]], page 92, states, "''[...] '''within the asexual community, an important distinction is drawn between romantic sexuality and aromantic asexuality.'''''" The source goes on to note that neither group experiences sexual attraction...but that there is a difference between these two groups. As the source shows, the identities are focused (primarily at least) within the asexual community. |
|||
*[https://books.google.com/books?id=UNo5DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA256 This] 2017 "Nonbinary Gender Identities: History, Culture, Resources" source, from [[Rowman & Littlefield]], page 256, states, "'''''People who experience low or no sexual or romantic attraction are generally called asexual or aromantic.'''''" It does go on to note, though, that "nonbinary people can be straight, gay, lesbian, bisexual, queer, asexual, aromantic, or any number of other sexual identity terms.''" |
|||
*[https://books.google.com/books?id=_f9KDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA218 This] 2018 "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Americans at Risk: Problems and Solutions [3 volumes]" source, from [[ABC-CLIO]], page 218, states, "'''''Within asexuality, one may possess a romantic identity, which defines the emotional, not sexual, attachment to another individual. These romantic attractions operate on a spectrum.''' Individuals may bear a homo-romantic attraction to individuals of the same sex, or they may bear a heteroromantic attraction to those of the opposite sex. Ultimately, the romantic spectrum is similar to the scaling of homo- and hetero- attraction on the spectrum of sexuality. [...] '''The romantic/aromantic spectrum creates divides with the community and questions whether asexuality is 'queer.''''" |
|||
{{collapse bottom}} |
|||
::All that stated, because some people who are aromantic don't identify as asexual, and the same applies vice versa, it is perhaps best to redirect the term to the Romantic orientation article and expand on this and different asexuality-related terms there. I have cut the article down, and might need to do so again if the IP goes back to their typical "need to save the article by any means" editing. It can be reasonably merged to the Romantic orientation article and cut further to focus on that topic. [[User:Flyer22 Reborn|Flyer22 Reborn]] ([[User talk:Flyer22 Reborn|talk]]) 22:24, 11 April 2018 (UTC) As it was, it was mainly stuff that applies to asexuals as a whole. [[User:Flyer22 Reborn|Flyer22 Reborn]] ([[User talk:Flyer22 Reborn|talk]]) 22:48, 11 April 2018 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Yes''' - I agree with Flyer22 Reborn, which I understand to be merge/redirect/expand at Romantic orientation (the main article). There is always room for it to grow beyond the capacity of the main article, so let it incubate there first instead of splintering off into separate articles before it's time. <sup>[[User:Atsme|<span style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em,#F4BBFF -0.2em -0.3em 0.6em,#BFFF00 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em;color:#A2006D">Atsme</span>]][[User talk:Atsme |📞]][[Special:EmailUser/Atsme|📧]]</sup> 23:25, 11 April 2018 (UTC) |
|||
A "Squish" is the Aromantic version of a crush. This could be on a really good friend or someone you find just generally attractive. You could get married to your squish, as most people do. How do you know you have a squish? You feel very close to them. Most squishes will probably be aromantic too. [[User:Aroace24|Aroace24]] ([[User talk:Aroace24|talk]]) 15:37, 9 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
===Discussion=== |
|||
Pinging previous editors who were involved in the AfD: [[User:Eddie891|Eddie891]], [[User:Szzuk|Szzuk]], [[User:Valoem|Valoem]] and [[User:Sandstein|Sandstein]]. IPs can't be pinged. [[User:Flyer22 Reborn|Flyer22 Reborn]] ([[User talk:Flyer22 Reborn|talk]]) 10:36, 11 April 2018 (UTC) |
|||
'''Note''': The IP also keeps adding poor media sources, a number of which are mainly about asexuality, and sometimes attributes these sources to aromanticism. The IP has also resorted to using interviews regarding certain people's personal experiences with asexuality/aromanticism to generalize material about aromanticism. And [[User:Atsme|Atsme]] is correct that I'm saying these asexuality-related terms can be expanded in the Romantic orientation article. [[User:Flyer22 Reborn|Flyer22 Reborn]] ([[User talk:Flyer22 Reborn|talk]]) 03:26, 12 April 2018 (UTC) |
|||
: If I quote an interview, then per attribution I avoid using factual language. [[Special:Contributions/79.67.81.118|79.67.81.118]] ([[User talk:79.67.81.118|talk]]) 03:32, 12 April 2018 (UTC) |
|||
: Also, most sources I have used are also used on many other pages. [[Special:Contributions/79.67.81.118|79.67.81.118]] ([[User talk:79.67.81.118|talk]]) 03:36, 12 April 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::You are adding any and everything to the article and hoping it sticks. You are artificially expanding this article in the hopes that it will be kept and people will say don't merge, some without even analyzing the topic and sources. Well, people can also vote to '''trim and merge'''. Like I stated on your talk page, you need to read [[WP:Reliable sources]]. Random online sources are not automatically reliable sources. We have the WP:Reliable sources guideline for a reason. And random comments about how certain celebrities, or non-notables, feel or what they state is [[WP:Undue weight]]. [[User:Flyer22 Reborn|Flyer22 Reborn]] ([[User talk:Flyer22 Reborn|talk]]) 03:41, 12 April 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::: Only two sources quoted an interview. You on the other hand removed 15 sources.[[Special:Contributions/79.67.81.118|79.67.81.118]] ([[User talk:79.67.81.118|talk]]) 03:51, 12 April 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::I said nothing of quoting interviews. I said you have resorted to using interviews regarding certain people's personal experiences with asexuality/aromanticism to generalize material about aromanticism. As for removing sources, did you even read WP:Reliable sources? Did you not not understand any of what I stated about reliable sources? You keep adding unreliable sources. Most of the sources you added were unreliable. And with stuff like [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Aromanticism&diff=836010334&oldid=836009890 this], you are acting like I focused on removing ''[[Huff Post]]''. I did not. Those ''Huff Post'' sources are there in either version. I focused on removing the piss-poor sources. [[User:Flyer22 Reborn|Flyer22 Reborn]] ([[User talk:Flyer22 Reborn|talk]]) 04:02, 12 April 2018 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 20:08, 9 December 2024
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Aromanticism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 2 months |
This article was nominated for deletion on 18 March 2018. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Confusion?
[edit]@Biohistorian15, please discuss what you find confusing as the section seems pretty clear - it lists a series of romantic identities that fall under the aromantic spectrum umbrella. Raladic (talk) 16:52, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Squish
[edit]A "Squish" is the Aromantic version of a crush. This could be on a really good friend or someone you find just generally attractive. You could get married to your squish, as most people do. How do you know you have a squish? You feel very close to them. Most squishes will probably be aromantic too. Aroace24 (talk) 15:37, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Categories:
- C-Class LGBTQ+ studies articles
- WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies articles
- C-Class Sexology and sexuality articles
- High-importance Sexology and sexuality articles
- WikiProject Sexology and sexuality articles
- C-Class sociology articles
- Unknown-importance sociology articles
- Articles created or improved during Wiki Loves Pride 2023