LGBT History Project:Editorial Policy

This page sets out the editorial policy for the LGBT History Project wiki. It explains the principles by which content is selected, written and reviewed, and describes how contributions are handled. It applies to all contributors. Version: 2.6 | Last updated: July 2026

1. Purpose

The LGBT History Project exists to provide accurate, balanced and inclusive information about LGBT history in the United Kingdom. Described as the country's leading wiki for LGBT history, it documents the people, places, organisations and events that shaped LGBT life in the UK, and serves the whole LGBT community.

2. Editorial Principles

2.1 Neutral Point of View

All articles should be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV). This means:

Presenting facts and evidence without editorial bias
Representing all significant viewpoints on contested topics fairly and in proportion to their prominence
Avoiding language that advocates for a particular position on contested issues
Distinguishing clearly between established fact and contested opinion

Articles about movements, campaigns, ideological positions or contested organisations must include an explanation of the core arguments or positions held by those involved, presented in their strongest and most accurate form, clearly attributed to those who hold them. An article that covers only organisational structure, legal history or media coverage — without explaining what a movement actually argues — gives readers an incomplete and potentially misleading picture. This applies to gender-critical perspectives, trans-inclusive perspectives and any other contested position covered by this wiki. Where a significant counter-argument exists, it should be noted alongside the position it contests.

2.2 Inclusivity

The LGBT History Project serves the whole LGBT community, including lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, non-binary and queer people. Articles must not be written in a way that is hostile to, dismissive of, or demeaning towards any part of that community. In particular:

Trans people and trans history are a legitimate and important part of LGBT history
Gender critical perspectives may be covered factually where historically or currently relevant, but must not dominate or frame articles in a way that is hostile to trans people
The false conflation of homosexuality with paedophilia is a well-documented homophobic trope and must be contextualised as such wherever it appears

2.3 Contextualising Contested Organisations

Some organisations covered by this wiki present themselves as LGB or LGBT but are contested within the broader LGBT community – typically on the grounds of trans inclusion. Where an organisation's stance on trans people is itself the substance of a dispute being covered, the article must provide enough context for a reader unfamiliar with the landscape to understand the nature of that dispute. In practice:

Where one party to a dispute challenges the legitimacy, representativeness or charitable status of another, that challenge and its basis must be explained – not assumed to be self-evident to the reader
Naming an organisation in the context of a dispute, without explaining what it stands for or why it is contentious, is a form of bias by omission – one that is particularly common on topics involving gender-critical perspectives
The positions of mainstream LGBT organisations are relevant context where they bear directly on the dispute being described

This applies in both directions: articles should not present a contested organisation as straightforwardly representing LGB or LGBT people if its standing in the community is itself disputed, but should equally avoid characterising it with loaded language from the opposing side. The aim is accurate description with context sufficient for a reader who does not already know the terrain.

Articles covering organisations that face significant criticism, or legal or regulatory scrutiny, must establish the organisation's purpose and work before covering those matters. An article in which controversy constitutes the bulk of the content – with only a brief description of what the organisation actually does – is structurally imbalanced, even if every individual fact is accurate.

2.4 Outing and Disclosure

Documenting a person's life is not the same as asserting their sexual orientation or gender identity where they have not themselves disclosed it.

Living people: Never state or imply a person's sexual orientation or gender identity unless they have publicly disclosed it themselves, with a citable, reliable source. Speculation, rumour, or inference from associations or behaviour is never sufficient, however compelling it may seem.
Historical figures (deceased): Documented relationships, behaviour and contemporary accounts may be described factually, with sourcing. Where identity is genuinely contested among historians, this should be presented as a live interpretive debate, not settled fact.
Absence of public disclosure is not evidence of absence. Many historical – and some living – figures could not disclose due to legal or social danger. This context may be discussed where relevant, but the wiki should not assert as fact what a person did not themselves confirm, unless supported by documented historical evidence.
Where a family member, biographer or estate has made a disclosure on behalf of a deceased person, this may be cited as a source, with attribution.

2.5 Historical Terminology and Anachronism

Words like 'gay', 'lesbian', 'bisexual' and even 'homosexual' are modern categories of identity that did not exist, or did not carry their current meaning, for most of the history this wiki documents – the word 'homosexual' itself was only coined in 1869. Applying modern labels to historical figures requires care in both directions:

Over-claiming: describing a historical figure simply as 'gay' or 'lesbian' can import a modern identity framework the person never had access to
Under-claiming: refusing to describe documented same-sex relationships purely because the modern vocabulary did not yet exist can become a form of erasure

The recommended approach is to separate documented behaviour from modern identity-labelling: describe actions, relationships and contemporary accounts factually with sourcing, and where a modern term is used for clarity, make explicit that it is being applied as an analytical convenience rather than a claim about the person's self-identity. Where historians disagree on how to characterise a figure, present this as a live historiographical discussion.

2.6 Historical Accuracy

Articles must be based on reliable sources. Where possible, primary sources and reputable secondary sources should be cited. Wikipedia's sourcing standards provide a useful benchmark. Unsourced claims should be flagged or removed.

2.7 Scope – UK Focus

The LGBT History Project documents LGBT history and heritage within the United Kingdom. This is a deliberate scope decision, not an oversight:

Biographical entries should be for people who are British, who lived or worked substantially in the UK, or whose notable LGBT-related contribution took place in or directly concerns the UK
Organisations, venues, publications and events should be UK-based or UK-focused
Historical events should have taken place in the UK, or have a direct and substantial connection to UK LGBT history (for example, legislation or court rulings that shaped UK law or society)
International context may be included within an article where it materially informs UK history (for example, the influence of the Stonewall riots on UK organising), but should not be the basis for a standalone entry

2.8 Use of Generative AI

The use of AI tools to assist with drafting, research and editing is permitted, subject to the following:

All AI-assisted content must be reviewed, verified and approved by a human editor before publication
AI tools may be used to draft articles, suggest improvements, check neutrality and assist with research – but the human editor is responsible for the final content
AI-generated content must not be published without human review
Where AI has substantially drafted an article, this should be noted in the edit summary

2.9 Oral History and Personal Testimony

First-hand memories and lived experience – recollections of the gay scene, accounts of activism, memories of specific venues and communities – are a valuable and distinct category of content that this project actively welcomes. They are not independently verifiable in the same way a court ruling or press report is, and should be presented accordingly:

Personal testimony should be clearly marked as such and visually distinguished from factual article content – for example, set apart in a clearly labelled section, not woven into the main narrative as if it were verified fact
Each piece of testimony should record, where possible: who is recalling (or that they wish to remain anonymous), the approximate period the memory relates to, and when the testimony was contributed
Testimony should be introduced as 'X recalls...' or 'in Y's recollection...', not restated as a flat factual claim

Contributors providing testimony about others should be aware that the Outing and Disclosure policy (Section 2.4) applies to anyone else they name.

2.10 Takedown Requests

Requests from individuals or organisations to remove or amend content will be:

Acknowledged promptly
Reviewed against the editorial principles in this document
Acted upon where the content is demonstrably inaccurate, outdated, or harmful
Declined where the content is accurate, balanced and appropriately sourced

2.11 Image Licensing and Provenance

Text contributions to this wiki are published under the CC BY-SA licence – see LGBT History Project:Copyrights for details.

Images are a different matter. A review carried out in June 2026 found that of 1,647 images on the wiki, only 5 (0.3%) carry explicit licence text. Many images are sourced from social media profiles or third-party websites with only a note of origin – not a licence or permission. See LGBT History Project:Photographs for the full image rights policy and the standards that apply to new uploads.

3. Image Policy

3.1 Licence Declaration

The wiki footer displays "Content is available under CC BY-SA 2.0 UK." This applies to article text. Image licensing is governed separately as described in Section 2.11 and LGBT History Project:Photographs.

3.2 Upload Confirmation

The file upload form includes a notice reminding contributors that they must own or have the rights to any image they upload, and that images from social media profiles, press photography services or other websites may not be used without the copyright holder's explicit permission. Images without a clear source and licence may be removed.

3.3 Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons Images

Images from Wikimedia Commons (commons.wikimedia.org) are generally safe to reuse, as they carry explicit open licences. However, an image appearing on a Wikipedia article page is not the same guarantee – some are used under fair-use rationales specific to Wikipedia that do not transfer to other wikis. Only images confirmed on Wikimedia Commons itself, with a clear Creative Commons or public domain licence tag, should be reused here.

3.4 Existing Image Backlog

Images already on the wiki with unclear provenance will not be mass-deleted. Many depict the subject of the article on which they appear and carry low practical risk. Individual takedown requests regarding specific images are handled under Section 2.10. Going forward, only properly licensed images should be added.

4. Editorial Governance

4.1 Account Registration

New contributors must apply for an account – open self-registration is not available. This is managed through the ConfirmAccount system. To request an account:

Click the 'Request account' link on the login page
Complete the application form, including a brief note about your interest in contributing
The project administrator reviews your application and contacts you by email

Approved editors are assigned a standard contributor account. Trusted editors who have made sustained positive contributions may be given additional permissions over time.

4.2 Content Review

Edits and file uploads by registered contributors (other than administrators) are held in a pending review queue and are not visible to other readers until approved by an administrator. This means your first edits may not appear immediately – this is by design, not a technical fault.

Administrators review the queue at Special:Moderation, where each pending item shows what changed and provides Approve and Reject options. An approved file upload is also released at that point.

Established contributors who have demonstrated good editorial judgement may be exempted from the review queue, meaning their edits go live immediately.

This system is in place because the wiki underwent an editorial review in 2026 to address inconsistent application of neutrality standards on some pages. Pre-publication review is the mechanism for ensuring editorial standards are consistently met going forward.

4.3 Sensitive Pages

The following categories of pages are subject to enhanced review and are held to a particularly high standard of sourcing and neutrality:

Pages about trans identity, trans rights and related legislation
Pages about contested political topics (including debates around gender critical and gender ideology perspectives)
Pages about legal cases with ongoing relevance
Pages about living people

4.4 Editorial Team

The project is currently administered by two volunteer editors: Jonathan (founder and primary administrator) and Ross (co-administrator). As the project grows, particularly following its planned relaunch, it will be important to recruit additional trusted editors and administrators.

4.5 Edit Summaries

Every edit must include an edit summary – a brief description of what was changed and why. This applies to every save, however small. The edit summary box appears below the editing area, above the Save button.

Summaries should do two things:

State the size of the edit: use the "This is a minor edit" checkbox for small, uncontroversial changes – correcting a typo, fixing a broken link, updating a date, reformatting a reference. Leave it unticked for anything more substantial.
Describe what you did: a few words are enough – for example: fixed typo, added ref for founding date, expanded early history section, removed unsourced claim, AI-assisted draft, reviewed and verified.

Edits submitted without a summary, particularly substantial ones, may be queried by administrators before approval. A clear summary also helps other editors follow the history of a page and understand why changes were made.

4.6 User Pages

Every registered editor has a user page at User:[your username]. You are encouraged to write a short profile there – it does not need to be long or formal. Focus on things that are relevant to your editing, rather than a general biography. Useful things to include:

Places you live or have lived – helps other editors understand your geographical knowledge and which local history you are well placed to write about
LGBT organisations you are or have been involved with – membership, volunteering, employment or activism; anything that gives context to your interest and expertise
Professions you have worked in – particularly relevant if your professional background informs the articles you contribute to
General or specialist interests – whether that is a particular period, a region, a community, a type of organisation, or a personal passion that connects to LGBT history

User pages help administrators and fellow editors understand who is contributing to the wiki and build a sense of community around the project. An editor with a blank user page is harder to vouch for when it comes to decisions about extending permissions.

To create or edit your user page, click your username in the top-right corner of any page when logged in.