Talk:Xena

Since people keep going back and forth on this topic, I felt that I should bring it up on the talk page. Note: This same section will also be at Talk:Gabrielle (Xena).

As I stated to User:RafikiSykes, there should be care not to place characters in the bisexual category unless, as the category says, they are explicitly defined as bisexual. Just because a character has been with both men and women romantically/sexually, it doesn't necessarily mean that character is bisexual. Sure, many are sure that Xena is lesbian or bisexual, and Lucy Lawless (Xena's portrayer) believes that Xena is bisexual and was romantic/sexual with Gabrielle, but neither the show nor the creators identified them as bisexual, not clearly anyway; the creators decided to leave their relationship ambiguous as to whether it's romantic/sexual or not. Despite that, these two are LGBT-identified characters. Many fans see them as lesbian or bisexual. They are additionally gay icons, meaning that they are embraced by many within lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender communities. That's why Xena and Gabrielle belong in the LGBT category, in my opinion. They already have the LGBT tag on their talk pages for these reasons; they are within the scope of the Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studies. Placing them in the LGBT category is also a compromise for those wanting to place them in the bisexual category. 107.20.16.111 (talk) 19:45, 5 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

There are no xenaverse canon sources or reliable sources showing this character identifies as lgbt. Whilst wider discussion and speculation in the article can be included the character categories are based on the canon material/reliable sources. Lgbt studies means of interest to lgbt studies not that character is lgbt.RafikiSykes (talk) 20:06, 5 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

There are reliable sources showing that many in the LGBT community and outside of it identify Xena and Gabrielle as lesbian or bisexual. What you say about the LGBT tag is exactly what I'm trying to say about the LGBT category. It doesn't have to mean that the character identifies as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. Further, no character or real-life person identifies their sexual orientation to be LGBT. They identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (transgender not even being a sexual orientation), or by some other term, which is why you have the vast majority of LGBT characters being placed in a specific sexual orientation category. Not the LGBT category. When they do not personally identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender, or even by terms like pansexual or homoflexible, but are shown or implied to be lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender, they can be added to the LGBT category. That category is used for characters whose sexual orientations are ambiguous and for characters who are cited as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender by reliable sources while they or the show's creators have never identified them as such. The category is simply about characters who are identified as LGBT by reliable sources. It says "A category of fictional LGBT-identified characters appearing in films, television shows, books, comic books, and video games." That's Xena and Gabrielle. 23.20.59.196 (talk) 15:20, 6 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Some people calling the characters that is their personal opinions nothing in universe or from the creaters show them as that.46.208.223.87 (talk) 06:19, 25 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Oh come off of it. Anyone with common sense can see that you are RafikiSykes. An IP didn't just show up out of nowhere to revert me on both articles and comment on both talk pages. Stop trying to WP:Game the system, and start a WP:RfC about this already like any respectable editor. I've made my points, and you using my points about why these characters shouldn't be placed in the lesbian or bisexual categories to support your belief about why they shouldn't be placed in the LGBT category just shows that you didn't comprehend anything I stated about why they do fit in the LGBT category. 109.204.9.25 (talk) 21:17, 25 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

I think the broader Category:Fictional LGBT characters is the more appropriate here. Given the number of reliable sources discussing this aspect of the character, it is clearly a defining aspect, though it isn't specifically spelled out in a way that would allow a more specific categorization. It's important to remember that, as we are dealing with a fictional character, there is no objective truth to be had here, but that's not particularly a problem for categorization anyway. The discussions around this character's sexual orientation are clearly relevant to the purpose of the category, so it should be applied. I'd say it's a much better fit here than for some character where the orientation is more clearly portrayed, but relevant and less discussed in secondary sources.--Trystan (talk) 02:16, 7 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I notice that there's a COMPLETE RECAP OF PLOT DEVELOPMENTS and yet, no list of "media this character has appeared in" (there's an "other media" section, but no list of.. film/tv appearances). How'd the rabid fans screw that up? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.114.184.158 (talk) 15:30, 26 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Xena. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080117044113/http://www.afterellen.com:80/Print/2006/1/fanfiction.html to http://www.afterellen.com/Print/2006/1/fanfiction.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:33, 16 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Xena. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20061019015939/http://www.afterellen.com/TV/xena.html to http://www.afterellen.com/TV/xena.html
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060628043834/http://dir.salon.com:80/story/ent/feature/2005/09/15/xena/index.html?pn=2 to http://dir.salon.com/story/ent/feature/2005/09/15/xena/index.html?pn=2
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120625231948/http://www.afterellen.com:80/content/2012/02/afterellencoms-top-50-favorite-female-tv-characters?page=0,16 to http://www.afterellen.com/content/2012/02/afterellencoms-top-50-favorite-female-tv-characters?page=0%2C16

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:30, 20 July 2016 (UTC)Reply