Talk:Parental rights movement

Parental rights movement was nominated as a Social sciences and society good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (October 9, 2024, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

This article was nominated for deletion on 15 September 2023. The result of the discussion was keep.

While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.

Canada: Governments Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Governments of Canada.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Florida Low‑importance

	Florida portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Florida. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.FloridaWikipedia:WikiProject FloridaTemplate:WikiProject FloridaFlorida articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics: American Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Conservatism Low‑importance

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Discrimination Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Human rights Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

LGBTQ+ studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles

Sociology: Social Movements Low‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the social movements task force.

Articles for creation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 13 September 2023 by reviewer Qcne (talk · contribs).

Lead: Not verified in body

Hi, I was the one who created the AfC so I'd like to continue to improve this article. However, I'm unsure about what part of the lead is being requested to be verified. If you wanted to point out what you believe to be unclear, I'd love to write and find sources. If you have any suggestions about how to clarify, I would greatly appreciate your input. Thanks! MicrobiologyMarcus (talk) 18:51, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MicrobiologyMarcus. The tag is there to prompt improvement related to the "far right" descriptor. Which are the best sources to support that content? Can they be summarized in the body of the article? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 21:40, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject banners

@Dimadick: I think this article falls outside the scope of WikiProject Terrorism. I am not sure all the additional WikiProject banners you added are really necessary. Perhaps the 9 you added can be trimmed to just the most important two or three; like Florida, Sociology and Parenting. While you were adding banners, perhaps you should have replicated the B-class attribute in the first few banners into all those you added, because class appears to be common across all WikiProjects, and can be added to the banner shell too. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 07:31, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I usually wait a day or two before rating an article, to see if the rating is going to change. Dimadick (talk) 07:34, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Be Bold and reassess it if you think the assessment ought to change, either up or down. The most sure way to change it is to do it yourself. If it is going to change, then your change will provoke others to change it too. You still haven't explained why Terrorism is relevant. The article makes no mention of it and I think this is merely robust political discussion. It is not like this movement has people are setting off explosives and killing people they disagree with. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 07:51, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"You still haven't explained why Terrorism is relevant." It is one of the WikiProjects which cover far-right politics, due to their close association with political violence. The related article on the 2020s anti-LGBT movement in the United States mentions an increase of anti-LGBT violence in the United States:

"According to a 2023 report by the Department of Homeland Security, threats of violence against the LGBT community rose in the early-2020s.^[1] The FBI also noted a sharp uptick in the number of hate crimes committed against LGBT people, with the 54 percent increase representing the fastest rise in hate crimes of all groups in the country.^[2] In New York City, hate crimes against LGBT people doubled from 2021 to 2022, and they grew by 29% in California during the same period.^[3]^[4] In August 2023, Lauri Carleton, a business owner in Southern California, was shot and killed for keeping a pride flag outside her store.^[5]"

References

^ Margolin, Josh. "Threats against the LGBTQIA+ community intensifying: Department of Homeland Security". ABC News. Archived from the original on August 20, 2023. Retrieved 21 August 2023.
^ Bernal, Rafael (March 13, 2023). "Hate crimes up by double digits last year: FBI". The Hill. Archived from the original on August 7, 2023. Retrieved 21 August 2023.
^ Krauth, Dan (June 14, 2022). "Hate crimes up by nearly 50% in LGBTQ+ community across New York City". ABC 7 NY. Archived from the original on March 28, 2023. Retrieved 21 August 2023.
^ Sternfield, Marc (June 20, 2023). "Hate crimes targeting California's gay community rose by 29% in 2022, report says". KTLA. Archived from the original on July 4, 2023. Retrieved 21 August 2023.
^ Franklin, Jonathan. "A California store owner was shot and killed over a Pride flag displayed at her shop". NPR. Archived from the original on August 21, 2023. Retrieved 21 August 2023.

In other words, the far right is already "killing people they disagree with", and has been doing it throughout this decade. Dimadick (talk) 08:10, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

However, that is not explained in THIS article. For it to be relevant it needs to be explained - in the article. Never assume knowledge; if it is not mentioned in the article it isn't relevant. Readers know nothing if it hasn't been mentioned by the article concerned. In any case, what DHS and FBI are highlight is an increase in hate crimes, not terrorism. Also, there is no explanation of how that violence is caused by the movement. Correlation, alone, is not indicative of causation. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 08:30, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Cameron Dewe. Even as utterly opposed as I am to this misguided and hateful movement, I can't call honestly relate it to terrorism. The 2020s LGBT article can hang that label on the Carleton murder but no similar terroristic activity is attached to the Don't Say Gays. I was also confused by the Psych Wikiproject. It is also unsupported by the text. btw, in case this gets lost in the shuffle, this is an excellent start to an article! Kudos to the editors! Cheers, Last1in (talk) 13:26, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"I was also confused by the Psych Wikiproject." Which WikiProject covers transphobia other than WikiProject Psychology? Dimadick (talk) 14:13, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am not saying it has to go, just that I don't understand why it's here. My reasoning: We are at least two major removes from psychology. To get from there to here, we have to posit that transphobia is a phenomenon that is firmly within the realm of psychology as opposed to sociology, moral panic, and ignorance (there is no consensus in RS for that), then we have to posit that this particular social movement is attributable to the psychological phenomenon underlying transphobia, then we have to explain that in the body of the article. Finding an RS that says, "The Parental Rights Movement is a manifestation of the psychological condition known as {something}," seems like a major stretch and, frankly, a waste of the effort of what are obviously excellent editors. To me, it would be like adding the Biology Wikiproject because the ~~bigots~~ participants are mammals. Hope that clarifies my question. Cheers, Last1in (talk) 15:42, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

North America bias - WP:WTRMT

I've tried to address the North American perspective bias per the banner but I'm not sure when would be enough material to be adequate to remove the banner, per WP:WTRMT so if I'll leave it to another editor to remove. I've added sections on France and Ireland, although minimal. In the meantime, I will continue to find more examples. MicrobiologyMarcus (talk) 17:28, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Two closely related thoughts on that: I don't think the banner is useful in this instance, and I don't think that there is an issue to solve. This sort of movement (and even the motivating ideals) seems to be a uniquely North American phenomenon. This particular moral panic appears to be deeply rooted in their current culture wars. I think it would be like looking for international instances of Free Silver, Satanic Ritual Abuse or the Moral Majority. If the movement spreads (which seems unlikely without bedrock changes to certain precepts), then the tag would make sense. Cheers, Last1in (talk) 18:13, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done Thanks. MicrobiologyMarcus (talk) 20:17, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I added the tag after a suggestion at the AfD, I have no issues with the removal. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 21:39, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"far-right" in lead

What threshold are we seeking to be able to state that this is a far-right movement? We have three opinion pieces, though two of them are in obvious left-leaning publications. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 09:36, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think for a movement like this, we'd probably need more than opinion pieces to label them far-right (possibly researchers/experts), unless that becomes the most common designation for them and it isn't up for dispute. Until then I think we can only say "described as far-right". Tomorrow and tomorrow (talk) 23:34, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lead follows body!

There are a bunch of citations in the lead which are not used in the body. Per WP:LEADFOLLOWSBODY it is important that content in the lead reflects the content in the body. These citations and statements need to be reflected in the body, otherwise they should be removed. Zenomonoz (talk) 03:47, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Unsuccessful. FishLoveHam (talk) 14:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Parental rights movement/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Bobby Cohn (talk · contribs) 14:53, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: FishLoveHam (talk · contribs) 18:23, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be reviewing this! FishLoveHam (talk) 18:23, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, can't wait for your review! Bobby Cohn (talk) 18:38, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

A lot of single-sentence paragraphs. Consider combining some to make the lead look a bit cleaner. My recommendations: Add "Additionally, the parental rights movement..." into the second paragraph and the last two can be merged and reworded into one sentence.
Done, though alternatively. Worth a recheck as I went what I thought went together, which were generals aims/goals, and then start/spread/reaction. Open to further remarks. Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:16, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"preventing" → "to prevent".
Done. Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:01, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Add a comma after "without disclosing to".
Done. Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:01, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Capitalise "governor".
Done, also done throughout the article, with respect to other Governors as well, and in image caption. Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:01, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
After "LGBT activists", ref 7 is shown before ref 4.
Reordered. Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:04, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"indoctrination" → "the indoctrination".
Done. Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:04, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The word "abusive" doesn't feel right given the article's content, maybe "homophobic" or "unaccepting".
Done: "unaccepting". Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:16, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll take a closer look at this when we examine sources, but this lead possibly violates WP:LEADFOLLOWSBODY as refs 5, 6, 8, 9, and 10 are all used once. 5 and 6 are passable, but no mention of the content discussed in 8, 9, and 10 in the body of the article is a problem as it is a key concern of this bill.
Done I've expanded on citations in 9 and 10 in "§ Impact on LGBT youth" and included reference 8 amount the second paragraph there, though it may begin to look like cite overkill, they could all be expanded upon. Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:22, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Definition

"The phrase "parental rights" ... affiliations" This doesn't add to the definition and seems a little biased, it can be cut.
I've cut it. Done. Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"The modern ... similar movement in the 1990s" What movement? This could use a little more explanation. Also this sentence can be merged into the rest of the previous paragraph.
Done. Expanded on Caruso's thoughts, joined with previous paragraph. Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think to warrant its own subheading, the media responses section could be expanded a bit. There are many interpretations of this movement and this section could use more viewpoints.

United States

LaToya Baldwin Clark is a red link.
Done. Bobby Cohn (talk) 00:32, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"at least the 1990s" reword.
Done. "Groups have suggested that similar ideas by parental rights advocates, which have worked to restrict education on sex or sexuality, date back to the 1990s. " Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"...led to many conservative Christian parents" remove "to".
Done. Bobby Cohn (talk) 00:32, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"In 2022, the US state of Florida ... government reach into schools" Merge into one paragraph, also add citations after sentences using quotes.
Done Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:41, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Capitalise "senator".
Done. Bobby Cohn (talk) 00:32, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Capitalise "governor".
Done. Bobby Cohn (talk) 00:32, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the lead, "Don't Say Gay" is italicised and here it is quoted.
Done. Italicized throughout. Bobby Cohn (talk) 00:32, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Canada

"At the time" remove and attribute the quote "parental rights clause".
Done. Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:43, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"home schooling" → "homeschooling".
Done. Bobby Cohn (talk) 00:32, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"introduced policy" → "introduced a policy"
Done. Bobby Cohn (talk) 00:32, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"by Wab Kinew's New Democratic Party." No citation after the paragraph ends.
Added citation. Bobby Cohn (talk) 00:40, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"— and" remove the space.
Done. Bobby Cohn (talk) 00:32, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"schools should leave LGBT issues to parents" reword, reads a little informally.

Europe

Remove red links.
Done. Bobby Cohn (talk) 00:32, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"as Irish" → "as the Irish"
Done. Bobby Cohn (talk) 00:32, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Impact on LGBT children

This section's title would be more appropriate if named "Impact on LGBT youth", as teenagers are more likely to be impacted by this bill.
Done, I really like this suggestion! Bobby Cohn (talk) 00:44, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"A result of parental rights-focused policies is that forcibly outing individuals can exacerbate issues such as depression, anxiety, and self-esteem problems, potentially leading to long-term emotional scars and negatively impacting their overall quality of life." feels repetitive as the previous sentence talked about similar topics. Merge the sentences if possible.
Done

@Bobby Cohn: These are my initial comments, ping me when you've addressed them. FishLoveHam (talk) 20:49, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @FishLoveHam, I've completed the above list. I'll note that I see the recommendations and concerns by @It is a wonderful world (courtesy ping, I'm not ignoring these). I expect they may be brought up as well in the next part of your review, I'm just not sure how to go about addressing them right now in the process of your GAN review, this is only my second nom. Thanks, Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:48, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just work through the neutrality concerns and then ping me and we'll continue. FishLoveHam (talk) 09:05, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality

I am concerned about the neutrality of this article. I am not an expert on politics, but this article seems to be biased to criticizing the movement. It is a wonderful world (talk) 00:28, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The parental rights movement is a socially conservative political movement aimed at restricting schools' ability to teach or practice certain viewpoints on gender, sexuality and race without parental consent: This definition is vague ("certain viewpoints") and emphasises the restrictions on schools rather than the empowerment of parents.

One of the aims of the movement is to schools from using the preferred pronouns or chosen names of transgender and non-binary youth without disclosing to, or gaining permission from parents: Why is this aim so much more important than the others that it needs to be specifically mentioned at the start of the second paragraph?

More broadly, it aims to prevent the teaching of LGBT issues in public schools without parents' agreement: This is just a repeat of the second half of the introductory sentence

colloquially known as the Don't Say Gay law, by Governor Ron DeSantis: Too much detail for the lead.

Proponents of the movement have claimed that they aim to prevent the indoctrination of children by LGBT activists: "have claimed" is not neutral. MOS:CLAIM

The definition section lacks broad coverage. All we have is Jen Gilbert's definition which focuses on the contemporary controversial political ideas associated with the movement. This is a very narrow definition as it excludes people who don't care about the political issues and just want more legal control over their children's teaching. The neutrality is also debatable since "under the auspices" has negative connotations.

Perhaps a better approach would be to provide a neutral broad definition, focusing on the legal aspects, and then talk about the political issues that the movement is associated with.

The sourcing is massively weighted towards news articles. Is there not significant coverage of this topic in peer reviewed literature? It is a wonderful world (talk) 00:28, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with most of the above. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 08:51, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bobby Cohn: It's nearly been two weeks now and this review has made little progress, are you still planning to work on it? FishLoveHam (talk) 06:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@FishLoveHam, unfortunately something has come up and I have not been able to dedicate the requisite time to properly address the concerns raised above. I've probably been lying to myself thinking "I'll get back on the horse tomorrow" each day but I understand that's not fair to yourself and the proper timeline of this process. Courtesy ping @It is a wonderful world and @Rollinginhisgrave, I don't want you to think I'm skirting your concerns, and I do intend on addressing these issues. I apologize for the delay and taking up this time in your schedule. Regrettably, I think it would be best if I requested this GAN withdrawn at this time, I understand that will result in a failure, but I think that's best given my current situation. Bobby Cohn (talk) 12:52, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for not indefinitely putting it off until FishLoveHam would be forced to fail it. When you get around to addressing these issues in the future, can you ping me? It is a wonderful world (talk) 12:58, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am really sorry if it feels like I've been pressuring you in any way, please know that wasn't my intention at all. But given your recent comments I think it's going to have to be a fail for now. Good luck on addressing these concerns in the future. FishLoveHam (talk) 14:13, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[1] Margolin, Josh. "Threats against the LGBTQIA+ community intensifying: Department of Homeland Security". ABC News. Archived from the original on August 20, 2023. Retrieved 21 August 2023.

[2] Bernal, Rafael (March 13, 2023). "Hate crimes up by double digits last year: FBI". The Hill. Archived from the original on August 7, 2023. Retrieved 21 August 2023.

[3] Krauth, Dan (June 14, 2022). "Hate crimes up by nearly 50% in LGBTQ+ community across New York City". ABC 7 NY. Archived from the original on March 28, 2023. Retrieved 21 August 2023.

[4] Sternfield, Marc (June 20, 2023). "Hate crimes targeting California's gay community rose by 29% in 2022, report says". KTLA. Archived from the original on July 4, 2023. Retrieved 21 August 2023.

[5] Franklin, Jonathan. "A California store owner was shot and killed over a Pride flag displayed at her shop". NPR. Archived from the original on August 21, 2023. Retrieved 21 August 2023.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]