imported>Slate Vesper at 01:35, 27 April 2016

2016-04-27T01:35:40Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:35, 27 April 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:
	It's a shame I missed this vote on account of being inactive, because in all fairness, I would have voted "No". While I know it's a gesture of inclusiveness, to me it seems like the idea of an "LGBT/Q characters" category is treading on complex ground, and makes me question the necessity of it all really.		It's a shame I missed this vote on account of being inactive, because in all fairness, I would have voted "No". While I know it's a gesture of inclusiveness, to me it seems like the idea of an "LGBT/Q characters" category is treading on complex ground, and makes me question the necessity of it all really.

	I say this because it seems like labelling one character for their sexuality means we have to further label ''every'' character for their sexuality (e.g. "Heterosexual characters") just to fill the void, and then it prompts the question if we're going to end up with the notion of labelling the most trivial of things to characters such as eye colour, gender (i.e. "Male/Female characters"), and living status (deceased/alive), like I see on other wikis for anime characters ~~and the like~~, and I would have honestly thought the Assassin's Creed Wiki would have distanced itself from that approach in favor of keeping it concise.		I say this because it seems like labelling one character for their sexuality means we have to further label ''every'' character for their sexuality (e.g. "Heterosexual characters") just to fill the void, and then it prompts the question if we're going to end up with the notion of labelling the most trivial of things to characters such as eye colour, gender (i.e. "Male/Female characters"), and living status (deceased/alive), like I see on other wikis for anime characters for instance, and I would have honestly thought the Assassin's Creed Wiki would have distanced itself from that approach in favor of keeping it concise.

imported>Slate Vesper: Created page with "It's a shame I missed this vote on account of being inactive, because in all fairness, I would have voted "No". While I know it's a gesture of inclusiveness, to me it seems li..."

2016-04-27T01:34:13Z

Created page with "It's a shame I missed this vote on account of being inactive, because in all fairness, I would have voted "No". While I know it's a gesture of inclusiveness, to me it seems li..."

Páàjì titun

It's a shame I missed this vote on account of being inactive, because in all fairness, I would have voted "No". While I know it's a gesture of inclusiveness, to me it seems like the idea of an "LGBT/Q characters" category is treading on complex ground, and makes me question the necessity of it all really.

I say this because it seems like labelling one character for their sexuality means we have to further label ''every'' character for their sexuality (e.g. "Heterosexual characters") just to fill the void, and then it prompts the question if we're going to end up with the notion of labelling the most trivial of things to characters such as eye colour, gender (i.e. "Male/Female characters"), and living status (deceased/alive), like I see on other wikis for anime characters and the like, and I would have honestly thought the Assassin's Creed Wiki would have distanced itself from that approach in favor of keeping it concise.

Board Thread:Wiki discussion/@comment-3427635-20160329181932/@comment-1888015-20160427013413 - Revision history

imported>Slate Vesper at 01:35, 27 April 2016

imported>Slate Vesper: Created page with "It's a shame I missed this vote on account of being inactive, because in all fairness, I would have voted "No". While I know it's a gesture of inclusiveness, to me it seems li..."