For those of you who have more energy than I have right now

[trixtah]

There's a stupid fucker over on Wikipedia at the moment, who keeps reinstating a "notability" tag on Patrick Califia's entry. Now, it's no secret that I'm not Califia's greatest fan evar (although he has contributed many crucial things to how women now discuss and enact their sexuality, especially the deviant kind), but to question his notability is ridiculous. I'm personally grateful for plenty of his work and the resultant change in discourse, and I know plenty of people who are definitely fans and who acknowledge his contribution.

I edited the notability tag, which was promptly reverted. However, someone else reverted the reversion, which has stuck for now. If others would like to check in on the article occasionally - or figure out what the fucker wants (see the page history) in terms of assuring notability, since a comprehensive bibliography from "obscure small presses" apparently doesn't prove a thing - please go ahead.

If I had the time at present, I'd actually stick in some citations, since there should definitely be some more in there. The notability issue is just petty [homo|trans]phobia.

Comments

[micheinnz]

... boggling over here myself at Pat Califia not being notable.

Then again, the notability bug has been up Wikipedia's butt for quite some time now, and the horse is in an alternative fucking universe by now.

[trixtah]

In this instance, I think it's just one fuckhead individual, not general Wikipedia editing analness.

But I was outraged when I found that a listing of episodes of some UK TV show - like Eastenders? can't remember - was yanked due to "notability". I mean, puhlease, give me a break.