Talk:Recognition of same-sex unions in India

1878:"On the other side there's nothing special about marriages in a country where cohabitation and unwritten common law provides all the rights and benefits are homosexual couple would need (and remember there might be family tax breaks etc... aimed at married heterosexual couples that may not be required for homosexual couples)." Unfortunately, my question remains unanswered. What are these rights? Okay, family tax breaks. Do we have sources that these have been granted to same-sex couples? I do not dispute the fact live-in relationships may provide legal rights to different-sex couples, but sources confirming that same-sex couples enjoy these rights too are seriously lacking. We need these sources before claiming without evidence that same-sex couples have "legal recognition". Readers may incorrectly assume by reading the lead that same-sex couples enjoy some married rights akin to civil unions or partnerships when this is completely false. The couples in the 1785:

regardless". It seems live-in couples still have no rights to inherit, adopt, be protected from domestic violence, etc. Couples are "also entitled to legal recognition and protection." What does "protection" mean ? What benefits does "recognition" entail ? The first sentence of the lead: "India provides some legal recognition of homosexual partnerships as live-in relationships." thus seems very false. My understanding is that live-in relationships provide zero legal recognition and rights. If they did, why would couples have even gone to the Supreme Court to request (secular) marriage rights then ?

1886:"Before the supreme court ruling, there were also other rulings that provided some rights to homosexual live-in couples, so the text can still stand:" My understanding is that these were decided on an individual, case-by-case basis, and may not be applicable for all couples. And again, what rights did these rulings even provide? The rulings were very limited in scope, and not always decided positively for same-sex couples. In Uttarakhand for instance, one court dismissed one such case taking into account the opinion of the family members of one of the partners. 1812:

common law provides all the rights and benefits are homosexual couple would need (and remember there might be family tax breaks etc... aimed at married heterosexual couples that may not be required for homosexual couples). The fact is that the Supreme Court "recognised" live-in relationships even if the provisions provided to heterosexual couples and homosexual couples are different (and that should not inherently matter in a religion with multiple concepts of marriage and a country with numerous more).

2000:

sources. Based on the lead of this article at it is now, most readers will assume same-sex couples enjoy legal rights and benefits akin to civil partnerships. This is completely false. I was of the opinion that Knowledge (XXG) was supposed to be factual, not claim something without a single secondary source. Not the mention, the SMA provides for "secular marriage" in India. Are we to ignore that? Or are couples who marry under the SMA too "American"?

71: 53: 81: 1708:

live-in relationships are essentially purely symbolic, and this needs to be made clear. I don’t quite understood how mentioning partnership certificates is in any way noteworthy here. It’s a purely Japanese institution, not to mention not legally binding and likewise mostly symbolic. I’m also afraid you are "overcharging" the lead. I think most of this should be moved to designated subsections.

249: 22: 171: 143: 157: 397:(or maybe vice versa). At any rate, the lead was synthesis as "In recent years, Hindu-based same-sex marriage ceremonies have become even more prevalent" needs more than 1 source talking about the issue, likewise widely conservative. As for the legal validity, who cites this? can we see a reading of the text? The taboo part might hold water but what is the quality of the source? 2004:

relationship as live-in relation couples. It is not specific how these various rights and benefits are applicable to same-sex couples, because for them, live-in relationships are the only type of union recognised by law to some extent." Welp, that’s not convincing. It goes on to state individual case-by-case court decisions, which may or may not be applicable to other couples.

181: 319: 279: 1758:

system and the European style cohabitation system. What this article really lacks is a truly Indian view on marriage and LGBTQ marriage, and about how same-sex relationships can be recognised beyond providing marriage (which is what the partnership certificate is about). NPOV requires you to refrain from pushing secular marriage as the only option forward.

911:

physical and sexual violence against queer Indians that normalises such violence for queer Indians. Indian queer women have been reported to face endemic and pervasive nature of violence, such as psychological and verbal abuse, bodily harm, forced marriage, wrongful confinement, medical abuse and corrective rape.

648:. The reasoning is as follows: "shows that same-sex marriage has been a more mainstream and predominant topic. Although marriages indeed lack legal recognition, they play an important role in shaping public perception of same-sex marriage and as such I believe deserve to be noted here" (See Page Revision history) 1913:

I posted three links above that showed legal interpretation of certain rights and benefits being provided to those in live-in relationships. Even if limited or minimal, there are rights and most importantly they are recognition. If you believe in word for word equality on every form of marriage, then

706:

In 1987, Lila Namdeo and Urmila Srivastava, two policewomen from the state of Madhya Pradesh got "married" through a Hindu wedding ceremony. Narendra Virmani, the Inspector General of Police, discharged them after learning about the marriage. The couple was kept in isolation and not provided food for

1792:"What this article really lacks is a truly Indian view on marriage and LGBTQ marriage, and about how same-sex relationships can be recognised beyond providing marriage (which is what the partnership certificate is about)." Sure, but currently no such institution exists in India for same-sex couples. 910:

Furthermore, instances such as same-gender couples committing suicide together due to family opposition are expected to be under-reported as families tend to hide the suicide note, if any, left by the victims to protect "family honour." The family is reported as the primary source of psychological,

741:

on the first hearing, the alleged detainee was produced in the court but the court adjourned the hearing, the sent the alleged detainee back to the alleged detainer, and set the next hearing after a month. The court adjourned the hearing without justifications, sometimes, reasons in contravention of

630:

1.3.3 The Article includes multiple same-gender wedding ceremonies, where the marriage was neither legally recognised nor did the couple challenge the non-recognition in the Courts, contributing to the depth of detail and the quantity of text leading to undue weight suggesting same-sex marriages are

1757:

The remaining comment on partnership certificates overlooks that it's about providing a NPOV rather than the very Americanised viewpoint being written on this article. There's no reason why it shouldn't be included anymore than western concepts of marriage, along with the Chinese style guardianship

1677:

No history about the development of marriage in Hinduism, the meaning of marriage in Hinduism, and how it relates to the meaning of marriage for homosexuals. (For a made up example, if Indian marriage was only intended for couples who had a baby, then for most homosexual couples it would be useless

778:

The judgements in the cases pertaining to live-in relationships of different-gender couples rely on the gendered laws to recognize rights, obligations, protections and other related matters to couples in live-in relationships. Therefore, these case laws cannot be applied to same-gender couples. For

749:

On the eighth hearing, the alleged detainee said she did not want to return with the alleged detainer and the case was adjourned. In the ninth hearing, when the alleged detainee agreed to live with the alleged detainer, the court disposed of the case immediately. A little under two months after the

1784:

I have just read all these sources, and my understanding remains that the Supreme Court ruling was symbolic. One of the sources explicitly states it: "The apex court’s observation on expanding the definition of family does not translate to marital rights for queer people but it’s a refreshing step

1689:

The way that the article is structured is also very annoying and prevents meaningful literature on the topic. It's listing the situation from a law perspective when the majority of marriages in India are conducted without reference to the law (something like 70 to 80% of marriages are done through

1617:

to modify the content. RfC's are best used for specific proposed changes on which there is disagreement; for anything else, they tend to be a waste of time. I have removed the RfC template here, because I really don't think it's a productive use of editor time. If you want more eyes on the general

921:

caused by the quantity of text and depth of detail, the inclusion of almost every case on favourable ruling for queer and same-gender couples is problematic because cases with an unfavourable ruling for queer and same-gender couples are often unreported or under-reported by the news. For instance,

861:

International polling shows higher support for same-sex relationships because the sample consists of an English-speaking population. For instance, Ipsos acknowledges this issue: "The samples in... India... are more urban, more educated, and/or more affluent than the general population." Meanwhile,

730:

the alleged detainee expressed her desire to stay with the family and the case was dismissed. However, Dr Surabhi Shukla points out that the court failed to inquire about the reason the alleged detainee was sent to a de-addiction centre. Additionally, the court ordered a psychological test because

579:

Same-Sex Love in India by Ruth Vanita: This source does not discuss the legal validity of the marriage between same-sex couples. In the page 209, She writes, "In a couple of cases, women were reported to have followed up a Hindu religious ceremony by attempting to file an affidavit under the Hindu

560:

1.2.1. In the Lead Section, the claim "While India does not recognise same-sex relationships, the vast majority of heterosexual marriages are not registered with the government and common-law marriage based on traditional customs remains the dominant form of marriage in India," is not supported by

1964:

The problem is that you've written the article with the idea of "getting equality for gay marriage as it was in America" and tried to achieve this through secular marriage. What you wrote is not a description of marriage in India, but rather your political view on what marriage should be like in

1707:

I have no problem adding information on what you have listed. However, claiming that live-in relationships provide legal rights, benefits and protection to same-sex couples remains unsourced. Are cohabiting same-sex couples able to inherit? Can they open joint bank accounts? Adopt? If not, these

1999:

This article definitely had its issues beforehand, but now this is just ridiculous. I am going to assume it is good faith however. We have zero sources confirming that same-sex couples enjoy any legal rights. Tax breaks? No sources. Inheritance? No sources. Protection from domestic violence? No

1811:

Firstly, the recognition of the homosexual live-in relationships should not be dismissed as merely being symbolic, and the recognition of same-sex relationships is what this article is about. On the other side there's nothing special about marriages in a country where cohabitation and unwritten

418:

Agreed. The page is titled "Recognition of same-sex unions in India" but it is riddled with stories of random wedding ceremonies. It is like the page was written by fujoshi, or by a probably closeted and/or single person who has no sense of reality. If only the read the petition of ongoing case

723:

Dr Surabhi Shukla critically analysed live-in relationship cases between queer women before and after the Navtej judgment and found that lack of respect for the autonomy of women continues to characterise the disposal of these cases. She reports investigative illegalities and violations of the

1968:

The way in which this article is constructed also makes it impossible to write about anything other than a single form of secular marriage, or at the most reforming existing laws to include gay couples - the latter of course does not make sense when the vast majority of gay marriages aren't

2003:

Your first source states this: "India has decriminalised section 377 of the Indian Penal Code excluded consensual homosexual intercourse from its ambit. But legal protection have not been given for same-sex marriages therefore homosexual couples are left with only one option to carry their

1661:

This article is facing huge issues with gatekeeping from one or two editors. I'm going to be bold and just say that this article looks like it's written by an Indian American looking to get a top grade on his essay who doesn't actually understand anything about India or homosexuality.

626:

1.3.2 In "State and territory laws" section extensively discusses every habeas corpus and protection order case contributing to depth of detail and the quantity of text leading to undue weight, suggesting a queer-friendly justice system. (For explanation, see 2.3, 2.6, 2.7 &

595:

Homosexuality in India: Past and Present: This source discusses the 1987 marriage between two policewomen, which cannot be considered as "validation," as it resulted in termination of employment, detention and starvation, and forced medical examination. (For an explanation, see

1684:

No information about how marriage has been discussed in Hindu and Indian communities worldwide, and about situations similar to India but are non-Western in origin (non-western and in particular non-American viewpoints about LGBTQ topics are very important in the context of

1669:

Overemphasis on marriage as the only form of same-sex relationship recognition, when there are numerous other forms of recognition (live-in relationships, common law marriage, civil unions...), and not forgetting the guardianship system and partnership certificates in East

1484:

To answer one of your points about the unregistered marriages; it's a widely understood point that I think most Indians would understand but would be hard to find a source less pulling up the statistics for every marriage office and comparing them to undocumented marriages

1841:

You touch on the problem in that the legal concept of marriage was defined during colonialism and is designed around the western concept of marriage. You're way of thinking in this article only works when you're dealing with the western concept of marriage (or secular

622:

1.3.1 In "Background" section, draws attention to the first reported same-gender wedding in India, but fails to provide the complete picture, which includes termination of employment, detention and starvation, and forced medical examination. (For an explanation, see

699:

As of 1st October 2023, same-sex marriage is not recognized under any Indian marriage law. Therefore, same-sex couples are not "qualified to enter into a legal marriage" in India. Hence, the common-law marriage does not apply to same-sex couples in India.

2020:"Have you taken into consideration the development of recognition of same-sex relationships in Europe and Asia (for example cohabitation in Europe and non-western forms of marriage in Asia)?" This is an article on the legal situation in India so no. 707:

48 hours. They were subjected to a "medical examination" by Dr S.K. Mukherjee. They were coerced into signing papers without reading them. They were left in the railway station in the middle of the night and warned against returning to the barracks.

1914:

you need as a political issue going beyond recognition of same-sex relationships. Why don't you list what rights should be provided for same-sex couples? And remember we know that most Hindu marriages in India aren't legally registered anyway.

1909:

need tax breaks? How do you propose these married homosexual couples get children when they can't adopt? You're idea of equality is silly because it's not based on need and/or assumes that a homosexual and heterosexual couple need the same

1612:

Wiki6995, while you are correct that this page has serious issues, and that fixing them can lead to disputes, that is unfortunately part for the course on South Asian politics. This RfC won't fix anything, because the disagreement is about

667:

as a type of marriage that takes legal effect, without license or ceremony, when two people capable of marrying live together as husband and wife, intend to be married, and hold themselves out to others as a married couple. Similarly, the

2030:

of same-sex unions in their respective countries, i.e. what legal rights couples are afforded, the history of the legal recognition of same-sex unions, etc. All providing sources of course. I suggest we do the same for this article.

543:

1.1.3 The discussion of case laws related to "live-in relationships," extensively discusses the cases related to different-sex relationships, which may not be applicable to same-sex couples. (For explanation, see 1.2.5, 2.1 &

1838:"Marriage is an institution defined and codified in various Indian laws, notably the HMA and the SMA. It is not merely a Western concept, but is a very real legal institution in India as well. It is not merely an American POV." 1523:. The Supreme Court delivered the verdict as well. It is quite clear from the petitions filed by the petitioners in the case and the ruling of the Supreme Court that "unregistered same-sex marriage are valid" is a wrong take. 588:

1.2.4 In "Background" section, the claim that most couples seek the validation of family and community, and several female couples in rural areas and small towns have received this validation, is unsupported by the sources.

1673:

Overemphasis on secular marriage as the solution. Cohabitation is the primary path forward in Europe, religious marriages are the primary path forward in Asia. Focusing on secular marriage as the solution does not make any

423:), they will know how much discrimination and difficulties these couples face after their wedding ceremony. Almost all of them shared difficulties in getting a proof of residence if they lived in their partner's property. 1788:

Marriage is an institution defined and codified in various Indian laws, notably the HMA and the SMA. It is not merely a Western concept, but is a very real legal institution in India as well. It is not merely an American

564:

Homosexuality and the Indian: This source does not discuss the common-law marriage and only states, "In 1987, when two policewomen in the state of Madhya Pradesh in central India got married." (For an explanation, see

1882:

case proved this. In numerous interviews, they said they filed suit for lack of legal rights and recognition. Why would they have needed to sue if their live-in relationships would have granted them the rights of

2014:"Does it really matter for a gay person in India if they don't have the American concept of gay marriage as long as they have all the rights?" Sure, but they currently have a grand total of 0% of these rights. 835:. However, it was extended for the cis-woman in a different-gender relationship with the trans-man. The ruling by Orissa High Court and in line with the binding precedent of the Supreme Court in the case of 1934:

For what you are arguing, it's mostly meaningless to fight that way because gay people don't need it. You're fighting based off a Christian-American notion of LGBTQ equality that has repeatedly failed in

1345: 783:

while promulgating some factors to look into for testing under what circumstances a live-in relationship will fall within the expression “relationship in the nature of marriage” under Section 2(f) of the

2063:

What we need is an expert in Indian law who can shed light on the legal situation of live-in relationships and the rights thereof, and hopefully who can severely fix this article as it currently stands.

1516:

registered. For instance, a heterosexual couple who never registered their marriage can get passport and other official documents with their partner as spouse. However, a same sex couple cannot do that.

580:

Marriage Act, whose ambiguous language (an Act to regulate the marriage of two Hindus) makes it difficult for the authorities to refuse permission." However, she provides no citations for the "reports."

1747: 899:

The Poll noted that the remainder of the respondents either do not hold an opinion or do not wish to state their opinion which is remarkably higher as compared to the responses for other attitudes.

540:

or inter-religious relationship as well as socio-economic status, but not due to their gender. Therefore, it cannot be compared with same-gender or queer relationships. (For explanation, see 2.4)

1024: 1690:

unwritten common law). The fact is that if most Hindus don't use legal marriage then it's entirely possible that most gay Hindus won't use legal marriage too because that's how Indians do it.

573:

1.2.2. In "Background" section, the claim, "Indian courts have uniformly upheld their right, as adults, to live with whomever they wish." is not supported by sources (For explanation, see 2.3)

400:

More importantly since there is no regonition for this in India it is a moot point till it happens. the onyl part that has happened is the Delhi HC saying it should, which can be merged into

1950:

Have you taken into consideration the development of recognition of same-sex relationships in Europe and Asia (for example cohabitation in Europe and non-western forms of marriage in Asia)?

604:

Live-In Relationship and Indian Judiciary: does not discuss the same-gender relationship, and explicitly discusses the opposite-gender couples in the introduction and throughout the article.

568:

Homosexuality in India: Past and Present: This source does not discuss the common-law marriage and briefly discusses the 1987 marriage between two policewomen. (For an explanation, see 2.2)

1390: 2023:"Does it really matter for a gay person in India if they don't have the American concept of gay marriage as long as they have all the rights?" I don’t know, maybe ask Supriya Chakraborty. 2017:"could those rights be covered through live-in relationships, civil unions, partnership certificates (Japan/Thailand) or the guardianship system (China)?" Sure, but currently they don’t. 1732: 2126: 466: 305: 1737: 2116: 832: 785: 1953:

Have you taken into consideration the history of marriage in India, and the implications of that on how gay marriage would progress for Hindus, Buddhists and Sikhs in India?

576:

1.2.3. In "Background" section, the claim that same-sex marriage are legally valid akin to common law marriage is not supported by the citations. (For explanation, see 2.1)

1355: 1051: 1299: 821:

While there are notable cases as the following, they are either not applicable to same-gender couples or follow the narrow holding for live-in relationship rights.

467:

Talk:Recognition of same-sex unions in Andhra Pradesh#Proposed merge of Recognition of same-sex unions in Andhra Pradesh with Recognition of same-sex unions in India

1748:

https://www.vogue.in/culture-and-living/content/the-supreme-court-remark-about-queer-relationships-constituting-family-is-not-legally-binding-but-definitely-hopeful

839:

which excluded same-sex couples from the protection under the Domestic Violence Act of 2005. Bombay High Court extended the protection to trans-woman but relied on

792: 1845:

However we know that the vast majority of Indians do not follow legal marriage. Muslims follow Sharia Law and Hindus mostly have unwritten common law marriages.

1254:

Vio Map: Documenting and Mapping Violence & Rights Violation Taking Place in lives of Sexually Marginalised Women to Chart Out Effective Advocacy Strategies

1847:

Why is this entire article focused on the legal concept of marriage and writing about the progression towards the western/American concept of secular marriage?

374:

Sexuality is generally considered taboo in India, might it be better to state this, than to imply that homophobia is rampant, when more less it is sexphobia?

1117: 488: 443:

How can support for same sex marriage hover higher than support for homosexuality? Various figures for support for homosexuality among youth is only at 24%.

1927: 1828: 1752: 1324: 478: 2101: 852:

which is a landmark case, but for different reasons. The case is still limited in scope when it comes to live-in relationships of the same-gender couple.

1944:

could those rights be covered through live-in relationships, civil unions, partnership certificates (Japan/Thailand) or the guardianship system (China)?

109: 1681:

No history about the development of marriage in India, the meaning of marriage in India, and how it relates to the meaning of marriage for homosexuals.

1033: 2007:"For what you are arguing, it's mostly meaningless to fight that way because gay people don't need it." I am going to suppose the couples who brought 1491: 932:

were identified through scholarly publications (For case details, see 2.3). This is reflected in the Article as the Haryana section does not discuss

239: 1815:

Before the supreme court ruling, there were also other rulings that provided some rights to homosexual live-in couples, so the text can still stand:

1733:

https://www.livemint.com/news/india/supreme-court-on-unmarried-partnerships-queer-relationships-family-unit-as-real-as-read-here-11661705797437.html

790:

On the other hand, the cases related to the live-in relationship of same-gender couples have been narrow in their holdings. Some of these cases are

483: 1856:"Sure, but currently no such institution exists in India for same-sex couples." No such institution exists in India for anything you wrote about. 444: 2011:

did so out of boredom then, not because they can’t open joint bank accounts, can’t adopt, can’t visit as next-of-kin, can’t inherit property, etc…

810: 295: 1407: 1153: 2111: 229: 1738:

https://www.indiatoday.in/law/story/unmarried-queer-relationships-to-be-considered-family-entitled-protection-supreme-court-1993844-2022-08-29

1641:

Yes, I think there are significant problems. No useful advice comes to mind on how to fix them, but I'll let you know if I think of anything.

1947:

If you are looking for you're notion of equality, would that be possibly through Indian religions where the meaning of marriage is different?

985: 961: 804: 473: 1956:

Does it really matter for a gay person in India if they don't have the American concept of gay marriage as long as they have all the rights?

1188:

Prevention of Interference with the freedom of Matrimonial Alliances 2012 (in the name of Honour and Tradition): A suggested legal framework

105: 95: 58: 375: 1938:

If you provide live-in relationship rights in the required areas then the rest is symbolic to those with certain political affiliations.

2121: 798: 695:(d) They must have voluntarily cohabited and held themselves out to the world as being akin to spouses for a significant period of time. 2106: 847: 816: 1550: 2096: 1646: 1432: 1370: 1187: 826: 1558: 760:

has reported that the opposition to different-gender relationships and marriages is due to the fact the couple belong to the same

1425: 936:

where the court continued to adjourn the hearing until the alleged detainee agreed to stay with her parents (alleged detainers).

592:

Lesbians forced to live in anonymity in India: This source provides anecdotal evidence, which cannot be used for generalisation.

1591: 33: 772:. Meanwhile, the same-gender couples and queer couples face family opposition and harassment due to their queer identities. 204: 194: 148: 1059: 1006: 1922: 1917: 1823: 1818: 1554: 1928:

https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-4391-marital-rights-of-same-sex-couple-a-socio-legal-issue-in-india.html

1829:

https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-4391-marital-rights-of-same-sex-couple-a-socio-legal-issue-in-india.html

1753:

https://www.theswaddle.com/domestic-unmarried-partnerships-or-queer-relationships-also-constitute-a-family-supreme-court

1642: 1742: 356: 1453: 732: 394: 352: 2026:

I must admit that this is getting ridiculous. Have a look at other same-sex marriage articles. They all discuss the

750:

disposal of this writ petition, the couple ran away together and got a protection order from the Delhi High Court.

724:

fundamental rights of privacy, dignity, and equality are visited upon these couples during the course of the case.

1492:

https://lawrato.com/family-legal-advice/validity-of-marriage-done-as-per-hindu-ceremonies-but-not-registered-82498

1132: 1520: 420: 1905:

The fact you bring up tax breaks backs my point. Do homosexual couples need tax breaks or do homosexual couples

1595: 445:

http://www.thenewsminute.com/article/young-indians-are-homophobic-misogynist-and-orthodox-says-csds-survey-60003

840: 379: 39: 1576:

I agree that the article has issues. I'm not sure that this RfC is needed as I don't see any disputes here.

1194: 1183: 1162: 1149: 757: 731:

her family alleged that she was suffering from trauma and depression in contravention of Section 105 of the

1346:"Where is the love: 62 per cent Indians say same-sex marriages not accepted, finds Mood of the Nation poll" 21: 1399: 1286: 1010: 669: 401: 360: 2073: 2040: 1978: 1895: 1865: 1801: 1777: 1723: 1701: 1650: 1629: 1624: 1607: 1585: 1570: 1532: 1507: 1478: 765: 537: 502: 455: 432: 412: 383: 1325:"LGBT+ Pride 2021 Global Survey point to a generation gap around gender identity and sexual attraction" 1300:"Transgender person who identifies as woman eligible for relief under Domestic Violence Act: Bombay HC" 298:

on 18 September 2023. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see

1252: 1166: 2065: 2032: 1887: 1793: 1715: 291: 2069: 2036: 1891: 1797: 1719: 1261: 664: 553: 529:

1.1.1. Common-law Marriage does not apply to same-sex couples in India. (For explanation, see 2.1)

1729:

There are quite a few articles dealing with the Supreme Court judgement on live-in relationships:

1603: 1566: 1528: 1474: 451: 428: 1219: 918: 645: 1220:"Making sense: Familial journeys towards acceptance of gay and lesbian family members in India" 104:-related issues on Knowledge (XXG). For more information, or to get involved, please visit the 1581: 1231: 1094: 982: 958: 843:(referred to as sex reassignment surgery in the case) and in a different-gender relationship. 583:

Lesbians forced to live in anonymity in India: This source does not discuss same-sex marriage.

498: 1074: 615: 1974: 1969:

registered by law and conducted outside government influence through religious common law.

1861: 1773: 1765: 1697: 1620: 1503: 1086: 635: 408: 522: 1545:

Is the page significantly problematic, as indicated by the various concerns raised in the

1496: 1923:

https://lawminds.co.in/article_dummy/same-sex-relationship-laws-a-brief-analysis/?amp=1

1918:

https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-6583-same-sex-live-in-relationship.html

1824:

https://lawminds.co.in/article_dummy/same-sex-relationship-laws-a-brief-analysis/?amp=1

1819:

https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-6583-same-sex-live-in-relationship.html

1541:

Request for comment on neutral point of view, factual accuracy and relevance of content

1488:

For example I could find two sources which stated that most marriages are unregistered.

714: 327: 862:

Indian polls show underwhelming support for same-sex relationships and/or marriage,

676:

held that the common law marriages require that although not being formally married:

2090: 1599: 1562: 1524: 1470: 718: 717:

of the individual due to the non-recognition of their relationship and dismissed the

447: 424: 1743:

https://thewire.in/law/domestic-unmarried-partnerships-queer-relationships-family-sc

1577: 494: 186: 86: 1970: 1857: 1769: 1761: 1693: 1499: 1350: 744: 404: 1090: 70: 52: 1251:

Ghosh, Subhagata; Bandyopadhyay, Sumita Basu; Ranjita, Biswas (8 March 2011),

957:(1. paperback ed., Transferred to digital print ed.). New York, NY: Palgrave. 176: 76: 1369:

Azim Premji University; Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (2019),

1234: 1097: 1403: 680:(a) The couple must hold themselves out to society as being akin to spouses. 532:

1.1.2. Different-gender couples face family opposition or harassment due to

351:) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other 318: 248: 170: 142: 1282: 1026:

Less than Gay: A Citizens' Report on the Status of Homosexuality in India

769: 601:

1.2.5 In "Live-in relationships and other forms of partnership" section,

1075:"Queer Women and Habeas Corpus in India: The Love that Blinds the Law 1" 469:, perhaps we could discuss here any objections to the similar merge of: 788:, the Supreme Court explicitly excluded the same-gender relationships. 1218:

Ranade, Ketki; Shah, Chayanika; Chatterji, Sangeeta (1 August 2016).

202:-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the 156: 1561:? If so, kindly propose suitable measures to rectify these issues. 761: 533: 199: 101: 100:, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all 1618:

dispute, the relevant wikiprojects would be good places to ask.

393:

This page is uncited in the sources and directly copy+pasted of

313: 273: 15: 955:

Same-sex love in India: readings from literature and history

631:"more mainstream." (For explanation, see 2.6, 2.7 & 2.8) 247: 1519:

This was an issue that drove petitioners to file the case

775:

2.5. Same-gender v. different-gender live-in relationships

1941:

what rights do you want to provide to homosexual couples?

1590:

Any attempts to fix these issues through editing ends in

1406:: South Indian Young Feminists Conference, archived from 640: 300: 286: 1426:

The nature of violence faced by lesbian women in India

663:

The 9th edition of the Black’s Law Dictionary defines

198:, which aims to improve Knowledge (XXG)'s coverage of 1497:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4539877/

1431:(Report). Research Centre on Violence Against Women, 634:

1.3.4. The reasoning provided for the removal of the

977:

Black, Henry Campbell; Garner, Bryan Andrew (2009).

886:

2018, Azim Premji University and CSDS-Lokniti survey

1712:However, I agree the article can be restructured. 1512:Unregistered marriages are valid as long as they 896:Support for same-sex relationships: less than 10% 753:2.4. Opposition to different-gender relationships 2127:Knowledge (XXG) articles that use Indian English 1392:Lesbian Suicides and the Kerala Women's Movement 287:Recognition of same-sex unions in Andhra Pradesh 1852:Non-western/american solutions for LGBTQ people 1118:"The L World: Legal Discourses on Queer Women" 793:Adhila Nasarin v. State Commissioner of Police 1807:Recognition of live-in relationships by India 8: 1638:Hi, and thanks for your thorough work above! 489:Recognition of same-sex unions in Tamil Nadu 2117:Stub-Class India articles of Low-importance 953:Vanita, Ruth; Kidwai, Saleem, eds. (2006). 479:Recognition of same-sex unions in Karnataka 304:; for the discussion at that location, see 1454:"India: Second NGO Shadow Report on CEDAW" 924:Shampa Singha v. The State of West Bengal, 728:Shampa Singha v. The State of West Bengal, 331:, which has its own spelling conventions ( 137: 47: 19: 1073:Arasu, Ponni; Thangarajah, Priya (2012). 981:(9th ed.). St. Paul, Minn: West. p. 160. 893:Opposition to same-sex relationships: 50% 689:qualified to enter into a legal marriage 561:the sources. (For explanation, see 2.1) 484:Recognition of same-sex unions in Kerala 118:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject LGBT studies 945: 811:Sultana Mirza v. State of Uttar Pradesh 683:(b) They must be of legal age to marry. 296:Recognition of same-sex unions in India 139: 49: 1901:Legal recognition of same-sex marriage 1424:Fernandez, Bina; Gomathy, N.B (2003). 1372:Politics and Society between Elections 1023:AIDS Bhedbhav Virodhi Andolan (1991), 858:2.6. Society & Same-gender couples 1272: 1270: 1246: 1244: 1213: 1211: 1007:Criminal Appeal No. 2028-2029 of 2010 907:2.7. Family & Same-gender couples 805:Poonam Rani v. State of Uttar Pradesh 474:Recognition of same-sex unions in Goa 359:, this should not be changed without 7: 1657:Numerous problems with this article. 1546: 1334:. New York City. 9 June 2021. p. 38. 1111: 1109: 1107: 934:Monu Rajput v. The State of Haryana, 927:Monu Rajput v. The State of Haryana, 831:which extended the protection under 739:Monu Rajput v. The State of Haryana, 674:D.Velusamy vs D.Patchaiammal (2010), 192:This article is within the scope of 930:Madhu Bala v. State of Uttarakhand, 799:Rohit Sagar v. State of Uttarakhand 710:2.3. Queer Couples in Indian Courts 38:It is of interest to the following 848:S Sushma v. Commissioner of Police 817:Sreeja S v. Commissioner of Police 745:Shafin Jahan v. Ashokan K.M (2018) 713:The Indian Courts have questioned 256:This article was last assessed in 14: 2102:WikiProject LGBT studies articles 1452:Kalpana, Kannabiran, ed. (2006). 1433:Tata Institute of Social Sciences 1354:. 25 January 2019. Archived from 1224:The Indian Journal of Social Work 1050:Singh, Khushwant (30 June 1993). 827:Chinmayee Jena v. State of Odisha 214:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject India 121:Template:WikiProject LGBT studies 1283:Criminal Appeal No. 2009 of 2013 1079:Indian Journal of Gender Studies 317: 277: 179: 169: 155: 141: 79: 69: 51: 20: 234:This article has been rated as 92:This article is of interest to 1834:The Indian concept of marriage 1768:) 15:44, 5 January 2024 (UTC) 503:12:29, 18 September 2023 (UTC) 1: 2112:Low-importance India articles 866:2019, Mood of the Nation Poll 833:Domestic Violence Act of 2005 786:Domestic Violence Act of 2005 733:Mental Healthcare Act of 2017 726:For instance, in the case of 703:2.2. Same-sex Wedding in 1987 456:18:39, 7 September 2018 (UTC) 1131:(3): 564–592. Archived from 1002:D.Velusamy vs D.Patchaiammal 873:Opposition for marriage: 62% 692:, including being unmarried. 644:shows possible violation of 2074:21:10, 5 January 2024 (UTC) 2041:21:06, 5 January 2024 (UTC) 1979:18:05, 5 January 2024 (UTC) 1896:17:39, 5 January 2024 (UTC) 1866:16:30, 5 January 2024 (UTC) 1802:16:10, 5 January 2024 (UTC) 1778:15:51, 5 January 2024 (UTC) 1724:15:34, 5 January 2024 (UTC) 1702:14:52, 5 January 2024 (UTC) 1651:19:15, 2 October 2023 (UTC) 1630:15:34, 2 October 2023 (UTC) 1608:14:04, 2 October 2023 (UTC) 1586:13:33, 2 October 2023 (UTC) 1571:10:48, 2 October 2023 (UTC) 1533:19:31, 7 January 2024 (UTC) 1508:14:58, 5 January 2024 (UTC) 1479:22:09, 1 October 2023 (UTC) 1150:Twenty-First Law Commission 742:Supreme Court Precedent of 686:(c) They must be otherwise 395:Status of same-sex marriage 2143: 2122:WikiProject India articles 1461:National Alliance of Women 1091:10.1177/097152151201900304 781:Indra Sarma Vs. VKV Sarma, 612:1.3. Neutral point of view 461:State level article merges 240:project's importance scale 217:Template:WikiProject India 2107:Stub-Class India articles 1521:Supriyo v. Union of India 1389:Deepa, Vasudevan (2001), 1184:Nineteenth Law Commission 876:Support for marriage: 24% 837:Indra Sarma Vs VKV Sarma, 779:instance, in the case of 433:17:07, 6 April 2023 (UTC) 421:Supriyo v. Union of India 384:12:02, 21 July 2009 (UTC) 255: 233: 164: 64: 46: 2097:Stub-Class LGBT articles 1278:Indra Sarma v. VKV Sarma 1116:Shukla, Surabhi (2020). 841:gender-affirming surgery 660:2.1. Common-law Marriage 465:Given the discussion at 413:21:29, 21 May 2010 (UTC) 96:WikiProject LGBT studies 1643:RadioactiveBoulevardier 1195:Law Commission of India 1163:Law Commission of India 758:Law Commission of India 1287:Supreme Court of India 1161:(Consultation Paper), 1011:Supreme Court of India 979:Black's law dictionary 670:Supreme Court of India 402:Homosexuality in India 252: 28:This article is rated 1400:Conference Proceeding 914:2.8. Publication Bias 284:The contents of the 251: 108:or contribute to the 32:on Knowledge (XXG)'s 1559:relevance of content 1155:Reform of Family Law 357:relevant style guide 353:varieties of English 1262:Sappho for Equality 1260:(Research Report), 1172:on 17 December 2020 1138:on 20 October 2020. 917:In addition to the 665:common-law marriage 355:. According to the 1592:Disruptive editing 1304:The Indian Express 1289:26 November 2013). 1152:(31 August 2018), 1062:on 1 October 2023. 756:The 19th and 21st 550:1.2. Verifiability 253: 34:content assessment 1013:21 October 2010). 987:978-0-314-19949-2 963:978-0-312-29324-6 672:, in the case of 367: 366: 312: 311: 272: 271: 268: 267: 264: 263: 195:WikiProject India 136: 135: 132: 131: 2134: 1678:to get married). 1665:Issues include: 1628: 1555:factual accuracy 1465: 1464: 1458: 1449: 1443: 1442: 1440: 1439: 1430: 1421: 1415: 1414: 1412: 1404:Hyderabad, India 1397: 1386: 1380: 1379: 1377: 1366: 1360: 1359: 1342: 1336: 1335: 1329: 1321: 1315: 1314: 1312: 1311: 1296: 1290: 1280: 1274: 1265: 1264: 1259: 1248: 1239: 1238: 1215: 1206: 1205: 1203: 1201: 1192: 1180: 1174: 1173: 1171: 1165:, archived from 1160: 1146: 1140: 1139: 1137: 1122: 1113: 1102: 1101: 1070: 1064: 1063: 1058:. Archived from 1047: 1041: 1040: 1038: 1032:, archived from 1031: 1020: 1014: 1009:, Paragraph 33 ( 1004: 998: 992: 991: 974: 968: 967: 950: 879:Do not know: 14% 643: 636:Template:Cleanup 324:This article is 321: 314: 303: 281: 280: 274: 222: 221: 218: 215: 212: 189: 184: 183: 182: 173: 166: 165: 160: 159: 158: 153: 145: 138: 126: 125: 122: 119: 116: 89: 84: 83: 82: 73: 66: 65: 55: 48: 31: 25: 24: 16: 2142: 2141: 2137: 2136: 2135: 2133: 2132: 2131: 2087: 2086: 2028:legal situation 1659: 1619: 1584: 1543: 1468: 1456: 1451: 1450: 1446: 1437: 1435: 1428: 1423: 1422: 1418: 1410: 1395: 1388: 1387: 1383: 1375: 1368: 1367: 1363: 1344: 1343: 1339: 1327: 1323: 1322: 1318: 1309: 1307: 1298: 1297: 1293: 1276: 1275: 1268: 1257: 1250: 1249: 1242: 1217: 1216: 1209: 1199: 1197: 1190: 1186:(August 2012). 1182: 1181: 1177: 1169: 1158: 1148: 1147: 1143: 1135: 1125:NUJS Law Review 1120: 1115: 1114: 1105: 1072: 1071: 1067: 1049: 1048: 1044: 1039:on 4 March 2016 1036: 1029: 1022: 1021: 1017: 1000: 999: 995: 988: 976: 975: 971: 964: 952: 951: 947: 941: 737:In the case of 656: 655:2. Explanations 639: 515: 510: 508:Multiple issues 463: 441: 391: 372: 361:broad consensus 299: 278: 219: 216: 213: 210: 209: 185: 180: 178: 154: 151: 123: 120: 117: 114: 113: 85: 80: 78: 29: 12: 11: 5: 2140: 2138: 2130: 2129: 2124: 2119: 2114: 2109: 2104: 2099: 2089: 2088: 2085: 2084: 2083: 2082: 2081: 2080: 2079: 2078: 2077: 2076: 2052: 2051: 2050: 2049: 2048: 2047: 2046: 2045: 2044: 2043: 2024: 2021: 2018: 2015: 2012: 2005: 2001: 1988: 1987: 1986: 1985: 1984: 1983: 1982: 1981: 1966: 1962: 1959: 1958: 1957: 1954: 1951: 1948: 1945: 1942: 1936: 1932: 1931: 1930: 1925: 1920: 1911: 1903: 1884: 1871: 1870: 1869: 1868: 1854: 1849: 1843: 1839: 1836: 1831: 1826: 1821: 1816: 1813: 1809: 1790: 1786: 1781: 1780: 1759: 1755: 1750: 1745: 1740: 1735: 1730: 1710: 1709: 1687: 1686: 1682: 1679: 1675: 1671: 1658: 1655: 1654: 1653: 1639: 1636: 1635: 1634: 1633: 1632: 1580: 1549:regarding its 1542: 1539: 1538: 1537: 1536: 1535: 1517: 1494: 1489: 1486: 1467: 1466: 1444: 1416: 1381: 1361: 1358:on 2023-03-07. 1337: 1316: 1291: 1266: 1240: 1230:(4): 437–458. 1207: 1175: 1141: 1103: 1085:(3): 413–435. 1065: 1042: 1015: 993: 986: 969: 962: 944: 939: 937: 922:cases such as 916: 912: 909: 905: 903: 902: 901: 900: 897: 894: 888: 887: 883: 882: 881: 880: 877: 874: 868: 867: 860: 856: 854: 853: 844: 789: 777: 773: 755: 751: 736: 725: 722: 712: 708: 705: 701: 697: 696: 693: 684: 681: 662: 658: 654: 652: 650: 649: 632: 628: 624: 610: 608: 607: 606: 605: 599: 598: 597: 593: 586: 585: 584: 581: 574: 571: 570: 569: 566: 548: 546: 545: 541: 530: 517: 513: 509: 506: 492: 491: 486: 481: 476: 462: 459: 440: 439:Public Opinion 437: 436: 435: 390: 387: 376:140.90.131.108 371: 368: 365: 364: 328:Indian English 322: 310: 309: 282: 270: 269: 266: 265: 262: 261: 254: 244: 243: 236:Low-importance 232: 226: 225: 223: 220:India articles 191: 190: 174: 162: 161: 152:Low‑importance 146: 134: 133: 130: 129: 127: 91: 90: 74: 62: 61: 56: 44: 43: 37: 26: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2139: 2128: 2125: 2123: 2120: 2118: 2115: 2113: 2110: 2108: 2105: 2103: 2100: 2098: 2095: 2094: 2092: 2075: 2071: 2067: 2062: 2061: 2060: 2059: 2058: 2057: 2056: 2055: 2054: 2053: 2042: 2038: 2034: 2029: 2025: 2022: 2019: 2016: 2013: 2010: 2006: 2002: 1998: 1997: 1996: 1995: 1994: 1993: 1992: 1991: 1990: 1989: 1980: 1976: 1972: 1967: 1963: 1960: 1955: 1952: 1949: 1946: 1943: 1940: 1939: 1937: 1933: 1929: 1926: 1924: 1921: 1919: 1916: 1915: 1912: 1908: 1907:with children 1904: 1902: 1899: 1898: 1897: 1893: 1889: 1885: 1881: 1877: 1876: 1875: 1874: 1873: 1872: 1867: 1863: 1859: 1855: 1853: 1850: 1848: 1844: 1840: 1837: 1835: 1832: 1830: 1827: 1825: 1822: 1820: 1817: 1814: 1810: 1808: 1805: 1804: 1803: 1799: 1795: 1791: 1787: 1783: 1782: 1779: 1775: 1771: 1767: 1763: 1760: 1756: 1754: 1751: 1749: 1746: 1744: 1741: 1739: 1736: 1734: 1731: 1728: 1727: 1726: 1725: 1721: 1717: 1713: 1706: 1705: 1704: 1703: 1699: 1695: 1691: 1683: 1680: 1676: 1672: 1668: 1667: 1666: 1663: 1656: 1652: 1648: 1644: 1640: 1637: 1631: 1626: 1622: 1616: 1611: 1610: 1609: 1605: 1601: 1597: 1593: 1589: 1588: 1587: 1583: 1579: 1575: 1574: 1573: 1572: 1568: 1564: 1560: 1556: 1552: 1548: 1540: 1534: 1530: 1526: 1522: 1518: 1515: 1511: 1510: 1509: 1505: 1501: 1498: 1495: 1493: 1490: 1487: 1483: 1482: 1481: 1480: 1476: 1472: 1462: 1455: 1448: 1445: 1434: 1427: 1420: 1417: 1413:on 2021-03-05 1409: 1405: 1401: 1394: 1393: 1385: 1382: 1374: 1373: 1365: 1362: 1357: 1353: 1352: 1347: 1341: 1338: 1333: 1326: 1320: 1317: 1305: 1301: 1295: 1292: 1288: 1284: 1279: 1273: 1271: 1267: 1263: 1256: 1255: 1247: 1245: 1241: 1236: 1233: 1229: 1225: 1221: 1214: 1212: 1208: 1196: 1189: 1185: 1179: 1176: 1168: 1164: 1157: 1156: 1151: 1145: 1142: 1134: 1130: 1126: 1119: 1112: 1110: 1108: 1104: 1099: 1096: 1092: 1088: 1084: 1080: 1076: 1069: 1066: 1061: 1057: 1053: 1046: 1043: 1035: 1028: 1027: 1019: 1016: 1012: 1008: 1003: 997: 994: 989: 984: 980: 973: 970: 965: 960: 956: 949: 946: 943: 942: 940:3. References 935: 931: 928: 925: 920: 915: 908: 898: 895: 892: 891: 890: 889: 885: 884: 878: 875: 872: 871: 870: 869: 865: 864: 863: 859: 851: 849: 845: 842: 838: 834: 830: 828: 824: 823: 822: 820: 818: 813: 812: 807: 806: 802: 800: 796: 794: 787: 782: 776: 771: 768:or different 767: 763: 759: 754: 748: 746: 740: 734: 729: 720: 719:habeas corpus 716: 711: 704: 694: 691: 690: 685: 682: 679: 678: 677: 675: 671: 666: 661: 657: 647: 642: 637: 633: 629: 625: 621: 620: 619: 617: 613: 603: 602: 600: 594: 591: 590: 587: 582: 578: 577: 575: 572: 567: 563: 562: 559: 558: 557: 555: 551: 542: 539: 535: 531: 528: 527: 526: 524: 520: 519:1.1 Relevance 516: 507: 505: 504: 500: 496: 490: 487: 485: 482: 480: 477: 475: 472: 471: 470: 468: 460: 458: 457: 453: 449: 446: 438: 434: 430: 426: 422: 417: 416: 415: 414: 410: 406: 403: 398: 396: 388: 386: 385: 381: 377: 369: 362: 358: 354: 350: 346: 342: 338: 334: 330: 329: 323: 320: 316: 315: 307: 306:its talk page 302: 297: 293: 289: 288: 283: 276: 275: 259: 250: 246: 245: 241: 237: 231: 228: 227: 224: 207: 206: 201: 197: 196: 188: 177: 175: 172: 168: 167: 163: 150: 147: 144: 140: 128: 124:LGBT articles 111: 107: 103: 99: 98: 97: 88: 77: 75: 72: 68: 67: 63: 60: 57: 54: 50: 45: 41: 35: 27: 23: 18: 17: 2027: 2008: 1906: 1900: 1879: 1851: 1846: 1833: 1806: 1714: 1711: 1692: 1688: 1664: 1660: 1614: 1596:Edit warring 1547:talk section 1544: 1513: 1469: 1460: 1447: 1436:. Retrieved 1419: 1408:the original 1391: 1384: 1371: 1364: 1356:the original 1349: 1340: 1331: 1319: 1308:. Retrieved 1306:. 2023-03-31 1303: 1294: 1277: 1253: 1227: 1223: 1198:. Retrieved 1178: 1167:the original 1154: 1144: 1133:the original 1128: 1124: 1082: 1078: 1068: 1060:the original 1055: 1045: 1034:the original 1025: 1018: 1001: 996: 978: 972: 954: 948: 938: 933: 929: 926: 923: 919:undue weight 913: 906: 904: 857: 855: 846: 836: 825: 815: 809: 803: 797: 791: 780: 774: 764:, different 752: 743: 738: 727: 715:locus standi 709: 702: 698: 688: 687: 673: 659: 653: 651: 641:this version 611: 609: 549: 547: 518: 512: 511: 493: 464: 442: 399: 392: 373: 370:Article Tone 348: 344: 340: 336: 332: 325: 285: 257: 235: 205:project page 203: 193: 187:India portal 115:LGBT studies 106:project page 94: 93: 87:LGBTQ portal 59:LGBT studies 40:WikiProjects 1351:India Today 1200:22 February 1056:India Today 1052:"Gay Angst" 538:inter-caste 534:intra-gotra 326:written in 301:its history 2091:Categories 1842:marriage). 1582:¿question? 1551:neutrality 1438:2023-03-08 1310:2023-10-01 1193:(Report). 389:Notability 290:page were 110:discussion 30:Stub-class 2066:Panda2024 2033:Panda2024 1888:Panda2024 1883:marriage? 1794:Panda2024 1716:Panda2024 1621:Vanamonde 1235:2456-7809 1098:0971-5215 638:added in 554:WP:VERIFY 514:1. Issues 337:travelled 1600:Wiki6995 1563:Wiki6995 1525:Wiki6995 1471:Wiki6995 770:religion 646:WP:UNDUE 448:Hindianu 425:Wiki6995 345:analysed 258:May 2012 2009:Supriyo 1910:things. 1880:Supriyo 1685:India). 1578:Alaexis 1378:, p. 88 721:cases. 616:WP:NPOV 495:Klbrain 349:defence 238:on the 1971:Arind7 1965:India. 1961:etc... 1858:Arind7 1770:Arind7 1762:Arind7 1694:Arind7 1674:sense. 1557:, and 1514:can be 1500:Arind7 1485:etc... 1285:, 38 ( 523:WP:ROC 405:Lihaas 341:centre 333:colour 292:merged 36:scale. 1935:Asia. 1670:Asia. 1457:(PDF) 1429:(PDF) 1411:(PDF) 1396:(PDF) 1376:(PDF) 1332:Ipsos 1328:(PDF) 1258:(PDF) 1191:(PDF) 1170:(PDF) 1159:(PDF) 1136:(PDF) 1121:(PDF) 1037:(PDF) 1030:(PDF) 766:caste 762:gotra 294:into 211:India 200:India 149:India 102:LGBTQ 2070:talk 2037:talk 1975:talk 1892:talk 1862:talk 1798:talk 1789:POV. 1774:talk 1766:talk 1720:talk 1698:talk 1647:talk 1625:Talk 1604:talk 1567:talk 1529:talk 1504:talk 1475:talk 1232:ISSN 1202:2023 1095:ISSN 983:ISBN 959:ISBN 814:and 627:2.8) 623:2.2) 596:2.2) 565:2.2) 544:2.5) 499:talk 452:talk 429:talk 409:talk 380:talk 1615:how 1594:or 1402:), 1087:doi 735:. 230:Low 2093:: 2072:) 2039:) 1977:) 1894:) 1864:) 1800:) 1776:) 1722:) 1700:) 1649:) 1606:) 1598:. 1569:) 1553:, 1531:) 1506:) 1477:) 1459:. 1348:. 1330:. 1302:. 1281:, 1269:^ 1243:^ 1228:77 1226:. 1222:. 1210:^ 1129:13 1127:. 1123:. 1106:^ 1093:. 1083:19 1081:. 1077:. 1054:. 1005:, 808:, 618:) 556:) 536:, 525:) 501:) 454:) 431:) 411:) 382:) 347:, 343:, 339:, 335:, 2068:( 2035:( 1973:( 1890:( 1860:( 1796:( 1772:( 1764:( 1718:( 1696:( 1645:( 1627:) 1623:( 1602:( 1565:( 1527:( 1502:( 1473:( 1463:. 1441:. 1398:( 1313:. 1237:. 1204:. 1100:. 1089:: 990:. 966:. 850:, 829:, 819:. 801:, 795:, 747:. 614:( 552:( 521:( 497:( 450:( 427:( 419:( 407:( 378:( 363:. 308:. 260:. 242:. 208:. 112:. 42::

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index