The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Move. As a majority of participants have noted, WP:COMMONNAME is the prevailing guideline here; the official name and the name in Polish don't carry weight. Cúchullain ^t/c 20:17, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT ideology-free zone → LGBT-free zones – WP:COMMONNAME, WP:CONCISE. The zones are most commonly referred to as "LGBT-free zones" in independent reliable sources. (t · c) buidhe 17:52, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

—Relisting. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 17:04, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: "LGBT-free zones" is used by The Independent, NYT, CNN, Euronews, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Deutsche Welle, France24, Balkan Insight, BBC, Human Rights Watch, Raidió Teilifís Éireann, Gazeta Wyborcza (English), not to mention many Polish-language media. Quotation marks are not used in Wikipedia article titles, however some Wikipedia articles start with the equivalent of "LGBT-free zones" are ... (see Category:Words and phrases introduced in the 19th century). (t · c) buidhe 17:52, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per the previous discussion El Millo (talk) 19:54, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per the previous discussion and buidhe's summary. François Robere (talk) 20:50, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support With inverted commas in the name as per LGBT_rights_in_Poland#"LGBT_free_zones" Chrisdevelop (talk) 21:40, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Didn't you open a merger proposal that is still open above, following your failed move proposal above that?. Why the sudden change? --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 16:09, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, that is still active, and could go ahead regardless of this name change/move proposal made further up the Talk thread. The point has been made that the merge target LGBT rights in Poland already exceeds the Wikipedia maximum of 100,000, and should itself be split up. However, LGBT history in Poland has enough remaining space to accommodate a merger. The Merge proposal hasn't attracted overwhelming support at this stage, however the move idea is getting legs after all. Chrisdevelop (talk) 23:23, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Just noting that this discussion has been spread over several threads and pages (somewhat confusingly), so the fact that it's finally concentrated into a couple of formalized proposals is a good thing. François Robere (talk) 11:41, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per WP:COMMONNAME and buidhe's summary. Plural is clearly apt here. Pincrete (talk) 21:42, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Using an unofficial, negatively charged title violates NPOVTITLE in my eyes.T Magierowski (talk) 22:24, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The term 'LGBT ideology' is ipso facto "negatively charged" and undefined. It is moreover not an "official" term used by all Polish councils, and the Mayor of at least one (Wieluń) denies the law it passed does what activists claim it does. The Polish vernacular overwhelmingly favours 'LGBT-free zones', and so does the vast majority of foreign reporting, e.g. BBC.Chrisdevelop (talk) 23:07, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose In Poland there is in fact not any single LGBT-free zone. It is a media term. All these areas in the official documentation are referred as free of the strange term: "LGBT-ideology", which basically has a common meaning of homosexual agenda. Therefore difference between such "ideology" and LGBT in general, is significant. I would rather suggest to explain what "LGBT ideology" term is used for and how it appeared. This is crucial to properly explain problem with these zones. Cordylus (talk) 00:28, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also the Polish article pl:Strefa wolna od ideologii LGBT, very clearly says the fact that "ideology" plays the central role in that discussion. Cordylus (talk) 00:33, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    What specifically is 'LGBT ideology' and who gets to define it'? Chrisdevelop (talk) 01:29, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Reliable sources on the topic which use the term (vast majority do not) state that there is not one, monolithic LGBT ideology but several [1][2][3] (t · c) buidhe 03:02, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    The COMMONNAME in English is "LGBT-free zone" - the Polish name is largely irrelevant. Of course the term is nonsense in so far as it is wholly impractical in a literal sense, but it is the job of the text to make clear that these sre areas that have made a series of declarations decrying what they call "LGBT ideology" and/or advancing traditional conservative, heterosexual family values. Most COMMONNAME's are a result of media use. Pincrete (talk) 08:24, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    I submit that none of these are "LGBT ideologies" (indeed, only one source uses the term), but liberal ideologies that underlie LGBTx and, in broader constructions, other minorities' struggles. I also submit that the use of "LGBT ideology" in Poland has nothing to do with either - it is meant as a way to dehumanize the struggle (IIRC it was Duda who said "LGBT isn't a people, it's an ideology"), not as a philosophical argument. What's more, proponents' understanding of this "ideology" has nothing to do with fact: they see it as coercive - "worse than Communism", to quote Duda - rather than as innately liberal and inclusive. In other words, literature and usage in this case seem as far far from each other as can be. François Robere (talk) 09:28, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    The term 'Ideology' appears to be grounded on the belief that LGBT+ minorities are quintessentially anti-family ideologues who want to turn the whole world gay. Opponents of equal civil rights for LGBT+ minorities believe homosexuality to be a 'choice' made by 'sinful heterosexuals', who for some inexplicable reason want to marry for life, another sinful heterosexual of the identical gender. This seems to be why there is such vehement opposition to teaching about equality in schools, in that they believe you can be taught by LGBT+ ideological fifth columnnists to acquire a particular sexual orientation, i.e. a heterosexual child could transmogrify into a homosexual after attending a lesson about equality. Chrisdevelop (talk) 19:58, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    What beliefs the term is grounded on are irrelevant. If it is the common name then we use it in the article, not try to merge it with another article. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:01, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    They're relevant if a definition for 'Ideology' is to be arrived at (assuming that this Move proposal fails). Chrisdevelop (talk) 20:05, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    What about if the proposal fails? A move proposal is not get rid of a word from an article, but to use the most appropriate title for the article. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:08, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    The only difference between the proposed Moved-To Title, and the existing Title is the word 'Ideology'. However, there is no proposal on this page to remove the word from the article itself. Chrisdevelop (talk) 20:17, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Then any discussion of how it "grounded" is irrelevant. We follow the name from the sources. If they explain what 'ideology' is then we can look at doing that too, but if not then we don't engage in WP:OR. -- Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:20, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    There is no proposal to remove the word 'Ideology' from the article itself, nor to engage in WP:OR. However, if the word is to remain in the Title, then there needs to be an explanation of what it means from WP:RS. Chrisdevelop (talk) 20:25, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Why is that explanation dependent on whether it is in the title? It should be dependent on whether it is in the article, assuming it can be sourced from RSs. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:27, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    If the article is all about Polish zones that are free of LGBT ideology, then yes, the word 'Ideology' needs to be explained with citations from WP:RS, otherwise, LGBT Ideology is 'known to exist', just as humans are known to exist, Polish governance is known to exist, and Nazi ideology is defined and known to exist. For there to be any point in having an article dedicated to Polish zones that are free of LGBT ideology, it needs to be explained what they're free from (or believe they are). Chrisdevelop (talk) 22:13, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Chrisdevelop and Emir of Wikipedia: If I may suggest that you're both essentially on the same side of the issue, and this is more a misunderstanding than anything else. Emir, we've had discussions on the title several times before, and some editors would defend the use of "ideology" regardless of sources; Chris is giving the answer to that, just to the wrong editor, as you're both basically in agreement on the title (and it happens - we both know it happens). In another context it could be an important argument to have, as the whole WP:NEUTRALITY of the article depends on our understanding of the ideas in play. François Robere (talk) 22:22, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support 1. Title "LGBT-free zones" was officially used by the European Parliament in the document (resolution) titled: "European Parliament resolution of 18 December 2019 on public discrimination and hate speech against LGBTI people, including LGBTI free zones (2019/2933(RSP))".

2. The term was not only used by liberal media but actually was widely used by Polish right-oriented media and popularised by the "LGBT-free zone" stickers widely distributed with right-oriented newspaper (Gazeta Polska).

3. It is needless to enter the discussion about unexistence of LGBT Ideology, as far as the sexual orientation from the definition doesn't imply any political, existential or philosophical views, and being homosexual, lesbian, transgender... is not connected with signing any ideological declaration or inscription to any political party, organisation etc. It is enough to say that the Polish court in its judgment (Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny w Gliwicach, July 14 2020) stated that "LGBT ideology-free zone" speaks in fact against LGBT as the particular human beings. 79.191.120.100 (talk) 20:09, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Another brand new WP:SPA account on a issue rife with sock puppetry. Volunteer Marek 21:52, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose the actual term used by the european parliament was "LGBTI free zones" not "LGBT-free zones". Also, just because the media or the european parliment coins a term does not make it "official" or even accurate for that matter - more to do with politics and/or propaganda. Also, I would stop using news media as "reliable sources" as it's becoming clear most news outlets in today's day and age have a inherent bias one way or another (CNN vs. FOX News is a great example), so using media terminology does not help neutrality. --E-960 (talk) 04:14, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  If you want to completely overturn WP:NEWSORG or WP:COMMONNAME, this is not the right place to have that discussion. Until then, news organizations are generally considered reliable for facts, and articles are titled after what they are commonly called in reliable sources. Care to offer a policy based rationale? (t · c) buidhe 09:00, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  @E-960: Can you please explain your reasoning in favouring the current title 'LGBT ideology-free zone' over the proposed Move Title?Chrisdevelop (talk) 09:12, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Simple, if you look at the actual municipal motions in question they DO NOT BAN GAYS from any geographic location. The motions usually just say that the local municipality will not introduce sex-ed in schools (leaving this matter to the parents) and will enact some small programs to support large families. The article itself states "Both of these documents were labelled in media as "declarations of LGBT-free zones"[39], but neither of them actually contain a statement of exclusion of LGBT people form any territory". --E-960 (talk) 09:41, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  The current Polish president, Andrzej Duda, elected on an anti-LGBT platform, considers 'LGBT' ipso facto to be a chosen ideology (as distinct from being an innate orientation), calling it "a form of 'neo-Bolshevism'" and so an 'LGBT-free zone' reflects that. If anything, 'LGBT ideology' is therefore tautological in the current Polish context. Chrisdevelop (talk) 11:04, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. English language NEWSORGs universally uses LGBT-free zone or zones, sometimes doing LGBTI or LGBTQ. No ideology in English NEWSORGs. The only people using ideology is some of the extremists who support anti-LGBT measures, and they use ideology to obscure. Using "LGBT ideology" is an endorsement of vicious anti-LGBT speech.Violet Chains (talk) 14:38, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • And yet another WP:SPA. Freakin’ a, how many WP:DUCK accounts are gonna show up here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Volunteer Marek (talk • contribs)

• Support. Coz there isn't such thing like "LGBT ideology". Natanieluz (talk) 15:34, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Please check out a new article LGBT ideology just created by User:Buidhe. Chrisdevelop (talk) 16:28, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • I find some of the rationales given here for SUPPORT, bias and not in line with Wikipedia guidelines. I guess enough people vote in support of the change it will happen, but it does not mean neutrality is being upheld. It's a classic echo chamber, media outlets use unfair or misleading terms, and then they are extensively quotes in Wikipedia as reliable, all the while Wikipedia:Systemic bias guidelines are being ignored. --E-960 (talk) 19:05, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Bearing in mind that 'LGBT' is regarded by Duda and his party as an ideology, by and of itself, can you explain why 'LGBT ideology-free zone' is neutral, compared with 'LGBT-free zones'? Chrisdevelop (talk) 19:15, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Whether LGBT is regarded as an ideology is irrelevant, especially the view of Duda and his party. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:16, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    It's relevant to the extent that this is in Poland, where the acronym 'LGBT' is regarded by the ruling party, and the state Catholic religion, as ideological per se, thereby making the word "ideology" in the title tautological.Chrisdevelop (talk) 21:03, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment If consensus is to move, i think it should be the singular form with zone, not zones, as per existing title and the longstanding Wikipedia tradition of using singular nouns where print encyclopedias would use plural. —Soap— 21:08, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per User:Cordylus.--Darwinek (talk) 23:28, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per E-960 and my prior comments, legislation is named LGBTI and EU Parliament also uses the term LGBTI [4] - GizzyCatBella🍁 23:37, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  So, 'LGBTI-free zones' then? Chrisdevelop (talk) 01:15, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Would that be clear how they named those zones? I believe the current name is just fine because it is defined in the heading of the article that there is no such thing as LGTB ideology. The dilemma seems to be that some media twisted the name of the legislation by eliminating the word "ideology." The bottom line is that the lawmakers called it "LGTB ideology-free zones," and no secondary source can change that, neither can we. "Also known as LGBT free zones" add to the title, maybe? Maybe add ("alleged") into the title? IDK. I would just leave it alone. - GizzyCatBella🍁 02:20, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  The title should not be more cluttered or less clear. 'LGBT' per se in the Polish context already means 'ideology of homosexuals and transgender', and has been declared as such by the ruling party, President Duda, the Polish press and the state Catholic religion. 'LGBT ideology' therefore, in the Polish context means 'homosexual ideological ideology' - clearly tautological. Since a third of Poland is now free of 'LGBT ideology', what specifically is it that they're now free from? Chrisdevelop (talk) 09:30, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose the authors of these declarations stated firmly that they are aimed at what they consider LGBT ideology, but not against presence of LGBT people.Sources showing what is considered as LGBT ideology by authors of these resolutions have been affirmed.I have to add as a supporter of civil unions and more LGBT rights in Poland I do not endorse these positions, but we should remain neutral in treating this subject. See below(again this is not endorsement, but pointing out background of these resolutions).
• 1.[5]

Część samorządowców z Lubelszczyzny wystosowała właśnie apel do organizacji i instytucji unijnych pod hasłem "Uwolnijmy Europę od ideologii". Na konferencji prasowej przekonywali, że ich intencje związane z przyjmowaniem uchwał anty-LGBT zostały źle zrozumiane, bo nigdy nie byli przeciwko ludziom, ale przeciwko ideologii.Na spotkaniu z dziennikarzami udowadniali, że celem tej ideologii jest utopia. - Ta utopia oznacza przede wszystkim dyktaturę mniejszości nad większością. Jeżeli pozycja rodziny, która przynosi wielki dar życia i wychowania kolejnego pokolenia, jest poniżana i kwestionowana, to z całą pewnością jest to świat, którego nie chcielibyśmy oglądać w naszych wioskach i miastach. I to jest to niebezpieczeństwo, przed którym chcielibyśmy chronić - mówił Radosław Brzózka z zarządu powiatu świdnickiego. Ten powiat jako pierwszy w Polsce przyjął uchwałę anty-LGBT. Translation: Part of local politicians from Lubelszczyzna issued an appeal to organisations and European Union institutions under the slogan "Let's free Europe from ideology". During press conference they were explaining that their intention connected to issuing anti-LGBT proclamations were wrongly interpreted, because they never were against people, but against ideology.During the meeting with reporters they attested that the ideology has utopia as its goal-This utopia means first and foremost dictatorship of minority over majority. If position of family, which brings great gift of life and upbringing of new generations is humiliated and questioned, than most certainly this is a model which we wouldn't like to see in our villages and towns. And this is the danger we would like to protect from-said Radoslaw Brzozka from swidnicki district. This district was one of the first district who issued an anti-LGBT proclamation.

• 2.[6]

Andrzej Pruś podkreśla, że stanowisko przyjęte uchwałą w żadnym punkcie nie popierało wykluczania społecznego, dyskryminacji, szykanowania przedstawicieli środowisk LGBT, a jedynie miało na celu wyrażenie sprzeciwu i dezaprobaty wobec prób promocji ideologii opartej na afirmacji LGBT. Translation: Andrzej Prus underlines that the statement in no point at all supported social exclusion, discrimination or persecutions representatives of LGBT groups, andwas only intended to express opposition to attempts to promote ideology based on affirmation of LGBT. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 02:14, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The acronym 'LGBT' or 'LGBTI' has been declared as 'Ideology' per se, by the Polish ruling party, President Duda, the Polish press, and the state Catholic religion. So, in Poland, which is what this article is about, the term "LGBT ideology" is tautologial - since in the Polish context, it means "homosexual ideological ideology". So now there are zones in Poland that are declared 'Free of LGBT ideology'. What is it that they're free from? Chrisdevelop (talk) 09:23, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment A search for "Strefa wolna od ideologii LGBT" gives 136,000 results; a search for "Strefa wolna od LGBT" yields 3.25 million results. Chrisdevelop (talk) 09:42, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Because media quotes wrongly each other. The zones are officially named as they are named - "LGBT ideology free zone". GizzyCatBella🍁 09:54, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Is there a WP:RS for all the councils that have passed their legislation, showing the name that each chose? Chrisdevelop (talk) 11:16, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  [7] they are all the same.GizzyCatBella🍁 11:26, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks. In the article intro, a 'failed verification' message has been posted for this source. Be that as it may, this Declaration No. 1/19 comes from the Lesser Poland Regional Assembly, a regional legislature (Voivodeship sejmik) of the Voivodeship of Małopolska (Lesser Poland). To get anywhere, a link to WP:RS for all thirty of the councils is needed, showing for each Voivodeship (4) Powiat (18) Gmina (16) the Resolution Title, the name under which it was promulgated, and the Date it was passed. Also needed is the degree to which these resolutions can be, and have been enforced, and any successful prosecutions pursuant.Chrisdevelop (talk) 13:21, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. Those opposing are quoting anti-LGBT material in Polish and analyzing it. Sane newspapers in Poland, and newspapers worldwide, use LGBT-free zone. There is not such thing as "LGBT ideology".--Pink999 (talk) 14:12, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Brand new WP:SPA account commenting on an issue which has been rife with extensive sock puppetry. Volunteer Marek 21:49, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Crucial for this discussion is the answer to the question of whether LGBT people are equal to heterosexuals. LGBT is a descriptive term and from the very definition means: "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender". So, in general, it describes non-heterosexual people and the crucial word here is "people". It is not a party, organisation or whatever that could have its official "ideological statement". If we would agree that there is such a thing as "LGBT ideology", then we would have to agree there is a conspiracy of people who are connected to each other by issues beyond their own control or free will, as (according to Wikipedia) is the sexual orientation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality). To accept the fact that there can be any conspiracy on this ground is quite similar to accept the nazi race theory, which also assumes that there is a world Jewish conspiracy. There are even more similarities here: creators of the term "LGBT ideology" use it to describe a form of dangerous "degeneration" that is a threat to civilization, as were treated in Nazi Germany any forms/manifestations of "Jewishness" etc. So the result of this discussion will be the demarcation of the border of what Wikipedia can treat as neutral knowledge and where ends the possibility of the discussion.79.191.120.100 (talk) 14:19, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Just because we use the terminology doesn't mean we accept that a thing exists. We have an article on Haunted houses, but we don't present the idea that the houses are actually haunted in Wikipedia's voice. If there is a concept that people call an 'LGBT ideology-free zone', or an 'LGBTI free zone', or whatever the most commonly used phrase is, we can have an article called that which describes the concept without agreeing that LGBT ideology is a real thing. GirthSummit _(blether) 14:32, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  The apt analogy to Haunted house conflates with "is there such as thing as 'LGBT ideology-free zone'" or "is there such as thing as 'LGBT-free zone'". The thing may exist or not exist, but the idea exists. In terms of WP:COMMONNAME, the latter wins hands down as the preferred nomenclature. Chrisdevelop (talk) 14:45, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  @Chrisdevelop here is an idea, why not rename it to "LGBT zones in Poland" since there is no such thing as LGBT ideology and there is not such thing as LGBT free zone ?GizzyCatBella🍁 16:52, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  @GizzyCatBella 'LGBT-free zones in Poland' could work, however this would then mean other countries such as Russia with the equivalent 'anti-LGBT ideology' laws could not be included. Chrisdevelop (talk) 18:05, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  @Chrisdevelop - But these are not "LGBT free zones", there are plenty of LGBT folks residing there. We are going in circles :) IDK what to suggest more. GizzyCatBella🍁 18:12, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  @GizzyCatBella These zones can't really be called "LGBT zones", even if a few LGBT people live there. That's actually the opposite of what they are, since the locals don't want LGBT+ people living in their neighbourhoods, and having to explain homosexuality to their kids. The council declarations are targeting LGBT+ minorities as a disliked class, since there are no parallel declarations against 'Heterosexual Ideology'. Chrisdevelop (talk) 18:21, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  I guess the reason I made the analogy with the haunted house was that the concept may be notable, and worth discussing, even if the subject is actually non-existent. Houses exist; ghosts don't, but enough secondary literature into the concept of a haunted house exists to support an article, which is naturally called Haunted House, rather than some complicated abstraction. Similarly, if there is secondary literature about the idea of an LGBT free zone, we can write about it, provided that we do so neutrally. The article should be called whatever the literature calls them. GirthSummit _(blether) 22:01, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support, per WP:COMMONNAME as reflected in sources. The name that the local authorities use in the related proclamations is not material. --K.e.coffman (talk) 00:53, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I find it important to bring up a fact not mentioned anywhere else on the page; in the Polish language, mainly in conservative media but also increasingly in everyday conversations, the word "LGBT" is used in the meaning of "LGBT ideology" or "LGBT movement". This is the crux of why the name "LGBT-free zone" sounds so horrific to people in the West and yet acceptable to (some) Polish people. Progressive-minded Poles seem to reject that use of the word LGBT, clearly stating that "LGBT are people", copying from the English use of the word. While I can't find a source backing up my claims directly, this article from Gazeta Prawna reflects on whether "LGBT ideology" exists (concluding that it does not). Kubi718 (talk) 00:59, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  I’m a Polish speaker; I’m confirming that Kubi718 is correct. - GizzyCatBella🍁 01:05, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  @Kubi718Thanks for the clarification. By targeting declarations against this disliked minority, these regions do appear to be aiming to be 'LGBT-free', since the locals don't want openly LGBT+ people living in their neighbourhoods and thus having to explain homosexuality to their kids. This, and the fact that 'LGBT' is already regarded as an ideology in Poland, supports the Title contraction.Chrisdevelop (talk) 12:34, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Erm, not entirely. Yes, some people consider LGBT an ideology, but that's simply because of homophobic propaganda - it's the same situation as calling antisemitism an "opposition against zionism ideology", originally in the fifties, but to this day promoted by the exact same ultracatholic circles.Trasz (talk) 16:14, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per nominator. JIP | Talk 14:11, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. One detail that needs to be explained, in particular to non-polish editors, is that the whole hoopla about "ideology" only happened after someone realized that openly discriminating against LGBT (as in, people) really looks bad. Literally everyone calls it "LGBT-free zones", the stickers by Gazeta Polska said just this, the "ideology" part is just a dodge added later on.Trasz (talk) 16:17, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Do you have sources for only happened after someone realized that openly discriminating. Who is that someone? - GizzyCatBella🍁 17:34, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Sadly, no. It was quite evident if you just followed the polish news at the time, but I'm not aware of an actual press article describing the timeline of the process (as opposed to articles explaining the general mechanism of catholic extremists inventing an "ideology" to dodge the homophobia accusations, which are relatively easy to find.) Trasz (talk) 17:53, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  So long as you invoke religious belief as defence, there is apparently nothing short of murder you cannot do to an LGBT+ person in Poland, despite employment protection for LGBT+ people being the law. For example, a Polish prosecutor has charged an IKEA manager with religious discrimination for firing an employee who called homosexuality “an abomination” on the company’s internal website. If convicted, the human resources manager who fired him could face up to two years in prison. In another case, an anti-discrimination conviction of a printer for refusing servivce to gays was overturned on religious grounds by Poland's Constitutional Tribunal. These two cases made the news in recent times, but if religious belief is adduced as defence, Polish LGBT+ people appear to have no anti-discrimination protection for employment, housing, insurance, education, healthcare or 'Public Accommodation'. This is analogous to many US states, where religious belief is green light to do whatever you want to a disliked class. Chrisdevelop (talk) 19:16, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - no opinion on the RfC itself, but its very obvious that there’s some hijinks going on with multipleWP:SPAs showing up here to “support”, with all of them being brand new and quacking loudly. Volunteer Marek 21:56, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  @Volunteer Marek: Do you suspect this discussion has been stacked? Care to name them? Is it just the 'Support' votes or have you checked the 'Oppose' voters too? Chrisdevelop (talk) 22:11, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  @Chrisdevelop Author --> [8] --> [9] --> [10]. GizzyCatBella🍁 22:13, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  @GizzyCatBella and Volunteer Marek: Is it time to CheckUser? Chrisdevelop (talk) 22:18, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  @Chrisdevelop They use VPN's; there are hundreds of suspected one. I think people gave up reporting them a while ago after these were blocked[11] and proceeded to change 500/30 restriction limitations in the topic area they were most active. Don't waste your time on it, just be aware that some of the !votes here may or may not be legit. Volunteer Marek distinguished them above. - GizzyCatBella🍁 22:40, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support as it the common name in the best sources. Even if there was an actual LGBT Ideology, it would not be possible to be free of it without also being free of the majority of LGBT people as well.AlmostFrancis (talk) 23:07, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Commment Meanwhile, in the news today. Chrisdevelop (talk) 01:32, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Yea, that's crazy, but I thought she [12] (Malgorzata Szutowicz in glasses) was arrested for this assault [13] not for hanging a rainbow flag on the statue of Jesus.[14]? - GizzyCatBella🍁 03:30, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Is there an English translation? More here. Chrisdevelop (talk) 08:34, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

TALLY

• Support = 11 (minus potential 3 WP:SPA) = 8
• Oppose = 6
• Majority = 2 in support

  The WP:MV minimum of 7 days having now elapsed, is this too close a vote to be considered a majority in support of the proposed Move, per WP:CLD and WP:CON? Chrisdevelop (talk) 14:11, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Chrisdevelop Maybe wait a day or two for additional input and if nobody else !votes then go ahead and do the move. - GizzyCatBella🍁 17:03, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  I have relisted the discussion. Might be worth closing the two merge requests at the same time. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 17:05, 12 August 2020 (UTC

• Support per WP:COMMONNAME as already mentioned in the previous discussion. "LGBT Free Zone" is the term unequivocally used by the international press so this article should be moved according to our guidelines; even if Polish-language legislation use various different terms. Dead Mary (talk) 18:24, 12 August 2020 (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.