Talk:Proseminar in Homophile Studies

Syllabus and other sources

Syllabus available here. Primary source documents are also available at the UNL archives through request. Urve (talk) 21:29, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

I am currently talking to the archives. They may have a directory of materials in the Crompton papers collection -- though that's not yet available (online or otherwise) -- so I will update with more information when it's available. Urve (talk) 12:15, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Stored under number RG 12-10-55, these are the materials.

1. Homophile course, correspondence, Peter McGrath, 1969-1970
2. Homophile course, correspondence, 1970
3. Homophile course, steering committee, 1970-1971
4. Homophile course, chairman’s advisory committee, minutes, 1970, Jan. 22
5. Homophile course, syllabus, 1970, Fall
6. Homophile course, prerequisites
7. Homophile course, designated texts, bibliography
8. Homophile course, topics list
9. Homophile course, tentative schedule
10. Homophile course, staff, professional participants
11. Homophile course, registration statistics, 1970
12. Homophile course, participant questionnaires, 1970 RESTRICTED
13. Homophile course, correspondence, Evelyn Hooker, 1970-1971
14. Homophile course, correspondence, other institution faculty, 1970
15. Homophile course, proposed revision, James Cole, 1970-1971

Urve (talk) 16:18, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Julia Penelope

It appears that Julia Penelope offered the first class in lesbian novels in the country at UNL. It does not appear to be linked to the proseminar in secondary sources, so I have omitted it for now. However, I am reaching out to some archives and sources that should know more. Urve (talk) 12:06, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

For whoever cares: This is almost certainly true based on my research and communication with others, but not presently verifiable. Urve (talk) 06:31, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Proseminar in Homophile Studies/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: GhostRiver (talk · contribs) 22:15, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

I can take a look at this! — GhostRiver 22:15, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Lede

• "Fall semester" → "fall semester"

• done

• "It became a visible target" for what?

• for politics as suggested by the following clause, but reworded

Background

• WL University of Nebraska–Lincoln in the body as well as the lede

• done

• close paraphrasing with director of the clinical training program in psychology, needs some slight rewording per WP:LIMITED

• reworded

• "he was listed" → "Crompton was listed"

• done

• Pipe "gay rights" to LGBT movement

• Gay rights is not a movement. But if I understand your point correctly (homophile movement maps onto the LGBT movement), these are not the same thing and it is anachronistic. The homophile movement -- a term that Crompton continued to use despite it falling out of favor for gay -- was concerned largely with gay men of a particular political persuasion (conservative), with lesbians and bisexuals on the periphery of the movement (if at all), and trans people not discussed. I'll do this if you insist but it feels quite out of place in the context of the article.

• A source should be included directly after the quote "procedure involved in the homophile course", per WP:INTEGRITY

• done

• "Apparently" → "Per Milan Wall of the Lincoln Star,"

• done with amendment (jargon)

• "requested that control of the course"

• this is a bridge verb so it is grammatically correct, but amended. see articles like Śmiecińska, Joanna (1 January 2007). "On Bridge Requirements in English". Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics. 43 (1). doi:10.2478/v10010-007-0008-1. - this might ultimately be an ENGVAR or individual speaker difference

• "said it would be seriously considered" → "said the request would be seriously considered"

• done with amendment to remove the word "request(ed)" from being in the same sentence twice

• "department with Cole as its coordinator" → "department, with Cole acting as its coordinator"

• done

• "the course's purpose is" → "the purpose of the course was"

• done

• "including through" → "through use of"

• done

Political reactions

• The course was controversial. Expand on this just in the topic sentence: controversial among whom?

• done

• said it was "not necessary" Clarify that the course was not necessary, not interfering with the course

• done

• Add (NIMH) acronym after the full sentence

• why? the acronym is never used in the article

• "senator" should be capitalized when referring to an individual
• WL Terry Carpenter

• done

• "suggesting that the hearing"

• bridge verb but done

• "On the final day of hearings"

• done

• "in addition to introducing" → "and would additionally introduce"

• done with amendment (do not like adverbs)

• "approval and prohibit" → "approval, as well as prohibit"

• I do not like this comma so I have clarified (what I believe you intended this to do) another way.

• "not only suit for study" → "not only suitable for study"

• done

Aftermath

• "before the legislature" → "before legislature" OR "before the state legislature"

• I think this is obvious from context - the previous section's last paragraph is about his testimony at the state legislature. The first suggestion is not how the legislature is referred to in Nebraska (I have never heard omission of "the"). The second one is redundant.

• "Two other bills by Terry" → "Two other bills by Carpenter"

• done

• Pipe "student newspaper" to The Daily Nebraskan

• done

References

• "Nebraska U" should be the work, not the publisher, with the publisher being "University of Nebraska-Lincoln"

• UNL archives is a better publisher IMO; done

General comments

• One photo, properly licensed and relevant to the article

• It's quite amazing that a Wikimedian was able to photograph Crompton while alive, and so close to the date of the course, offering it to us to use!!

• No stability concerns in the revision history
• Earwig score looks good at 14.5%

Putting on hold to allow nominator to address comments. Feel free to ping me with questions. — GhostRiver 22:36, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

GhostRiver Done most of the above; explained what I did not do, or what I did differently than suggested. Urve (talk) 06:30, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Urve Two more comments:

• I am asking you to add the link to LGBT movement because Gay rights redirects to LGBT rights by country or territory. The article on LGBT movements covers historical ones as well as contemporary, and has an entire subhead devoted to the Homophile movement, so I do not believe it is anachronistic.
• The discrepancy between "before legislature" and "before the legislature" appears to be done state by state. Pennsylvania exclusively uses the phrase "before legislature", hence my assumption that that was the universally proper terminology. My apologies. — GhostRiver 22:23, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

No worries at all, my friend. Thanks for the explanation. I'll think about the gay rights issue. As for legislature, that's very interesting. Pennsylvania must be like the UK - an act of Parliament, not the Parliament, etc. Appreciate your time! Urve (talk) 00:50, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Theleekycauldron (talk) 20:22, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Crompton in 1983

• ... that the Proseminar in Homophile Studies, offered in 1970 by Louis Crompton (pictured) at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln, was one of the first university courses about homosexuality? Source: "I want to reproduce a shortened version of an archival essay written by Louis Crompton, a pioneer in the field of gay and lesbian studies. The course about which he writes was among the two or three "firsts" in the United States" - McNaron cite, pp 167-168

• Comment: Open to other hooks!

Improved to Good Article status by Urve (talk). Self-nominated at 13:01, 19 September 2021 (UTC).

Interesting course, substantial GA on fine sources, offline sources accepted AGF. The hook is fine, but you could also go further and say that it was only held one semester. Does it really matter which university (... trying to avoid the repetition of that word in the little space we have)? The image is licensed and a good illustration. - In the article, you may want to separate Cited sources from Further reading (compare In Freundschaft), and may go a step further using sfn referencing (see also there) which makes the link from short citation to the actual definition of the full citation automatically. I wonder if there's an appropriate infobox. I understand that you are still exempt from qpq. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:52, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the review. No, university does not matter. Your suggestion for semester is good, and avoiding university name; perhaps these? (only differences is a word):

ALT1a: ... that the Proseminar in Homophile Studies, offered in 1970 by Louis Crompton (pictured), was one of the first university courses about homosexuality and offered only once?

ALT1b: ... that the Proseminar in Homophile Studies, offered in 1970 by Louis Crompton (pictured), was one of the first university courses about homosexuality and was offered only once?

I will ask you a question on your talk about sfn... thanks again, Urve (talk) 13:17, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! how is this?

ALT1c: ... that the Proseminar in Homophile Studies, offered by Louis Crompton (pictured) in 1970 as one of the first university courses about homosexuality, was held only once?

for two of the options --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:45, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Wonderful! Appreciate you as always, Gerda. Urve (talk) 13:51, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Modified ALT1c to T:DYK/P6 without image

FAC

Urve sorry that your FAC was not successful. Have you considered WP:GOCE/REQ? I've found that they can improve the prose of an article substantially and head off prose-related objections at FAC. Unfortunately, the turnaround time looks quite long at present. (t · c) buidhe 06:03, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

I considered it. Nobody had ever said there was an issue with prose, so I thought it was okay. I'm not interested in having another peer review open for months without comments or having a copyedit if I'll just get more opaque and unactionable feedback at FAC. I've removed this page from my watchlist. Urve (talk) 06:15, 28 October 2021 (UTC)