This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
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
Latest comment: 1 month ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I just created this article, and I'm wondering if it would be a better scope or more accurate title if the article was called something different like List of deceased heads of state reported to be LGBTQ or something similar. All the currently listed individuals are deceased. Any thoughts? I also know the initialism LGBTQ uses a modern conception of sexuality and gender, so it's tricky to put historical figures in boxes, especially when it's difficult to prove gender or sexual identity and expression. Maybe something like List of deceased heads of state reported to be sexual or gender minorities? Also some of them didn't seem to have been very closeted, like it was an open secret, or ignored. Should I change the term closeted? Is there a non-cumbersome way to reflect that nuance in the title with a change or should I keep it as is? Thank you in advance for any thoughts. Pastelitodepapa (talk) 09:45, 6 March 2025 (UTC)Reply