Talk:Paragraph 175

Paragraph 175 is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 9, 2004.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 16, 2004	Featured article candidate	Promoted
August 7, 2008	Featured article review	Demoted

Current status: Former featured article

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Germany High‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sexology and sexuality Mid‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality 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.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

LGBTQ+ studies

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 articles

Men's Issues Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Men's Issues, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Men's Issues articles 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.Men's IssuesWikipedia:WikiProject Men's IssuesTemplate:WikiProject Men's IssuesMen's Issues articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

June 2004 to December 2007

Early opposition -- sources?

At the moment, the article says -- 'beginning in the 1890s, sexual reformers fought against the "disgracful paragraph."

However, the footnote shows that the quote "disgraceful paragraph" comes from 1932, a very different era when Hitler was running for president and his ally Ernst Röhm's homosexuality was the subject of scandal. There doesn't seem to be any source for opposition to the law earlier in its history. Can anyone find a source, or should this paragraph be altered?

Dybryd (talk) 18:30, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here we go. Over in LGBT social movements, I find:

'In 1898, German doctor and writer Magnus Hirschfeld formed the Scientific-Humanitarian Committee to campaign publicly against the notorious law "Paragraph 175", which made sex between men illegal.'

That should certainly be mentioned, and the "disgraceful paragraph" reference moved down to the thirties.

Dybryd (talk) 19:37, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pity the paragraph that comes from is unsourced, though. —An gr 19:46, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment

This article lost FA status on August 7, 2008 and currently it is listed as unassessed. Since I can't assess it as A-class by myself, per A Class criteria, I am assessing it as B-class to keep it from being listed as unassessed until it is again brought up to a higher status. I recommend A-Class at this point until further work results in promotion again. It doesn't seem to have failed FA by much, mostly because the standards are being applied more strictly than in 2004. Although I think articles should be grandfathered (as admins are), unless they really slip from where they were when originally promoted. Or should we try for GA? Who agrees to promote to A-class? — Becksguy (talk) 06:22, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS - only for WP:LGBT project. — Becksguy (talk) 06:37, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

With the small number of citations, B class looks right to me. I doubt such a long article would even pass GA until more heavily cited. At least the 30 odd German citations should be ported over from the German wiki article. In terms of writing and content, i agree at is GA or A - assuming the content is true!Yobmod (talk) 11:19, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Statistics for East Germany?

The statistical charts are wonderful, pity there aren't any for East Germany. I'd go digging around for one but with very little knowledge of German I wouldn't get very far. Can anyone find something like that? I'll ask around other places but I don't know if I'll be able to get anything --Mike Oosting (talk) 17:28, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Gerhard Vogel

Can anyone help out with the article on Paul Gerhard Vogel, who was imprisoned under this law? It needs work. Exploding Boy (talk) 05:56, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's up for AfD! We've found a few refs, but more help is needed. Thanks! - Ruodyssey (talk) 18:49, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tuscany

I removed the statement about Leopold of Tuscany abolishing capital punishment in Tuscany. While true, it's inapposite: he did so in Tuscany, before becoming Holy Roman Emperor, and he abolished all capital punishment, not just capital punishment for homosexual acts etc. Mackensen (talk) 11:57, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]