![]() | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Effects of pornography on young people article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline
Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically
review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Effects of pornography on young people.
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
![]() |
|
Hi! I just moved this article from my draft space. Hoping to receive feedback to further improve it. Also, would anyone know how to fix the formatting of my references? The reference links seem to go beyond the reference borders and overlap other references. Csan6227 ( talk)
I added a review article indexed for MEDLINE (gold standard according to WP:MEDRS), which basically says we know nothing about it, just speculating about this topic, due to a lack of empirical studies. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 08:30, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Note that I do not say that harmful to minors
would be a false claim. In order to affirm that, I would need to have evidence against it, and this is exactly the point: there is no evidence for or against it, due to a lack of research.
Tgeorgescu (
talk) 08:02, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
So, the claim that watching pornography would be harmful to minors is not scientific, since science posits facts and theories based upon evidence. That pretense could belong to the ethics of some religion (i.e. non-science), but when stated as if it were scientific, it amounts to pseudoscience.
And there is an ethical reason why such research is lacking: research ethics committees will never authorize such empirical research. So, it is likely that we will never know.
The only way to know is scientific research, and such research is not allowed. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 02:58, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
To all who disagree with my statements above: show me your WP:MEDRS. tgeorgescu ( talk) 01:16, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
See https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/group/american-college-pediatricians . Wikipedia does not WP:SOAP for such hate groups. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 21:51, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi, The Other Karma, as you see my approach is: don't delete stuff I don't like, but instead supplement it with the mainstream academic view. If you think that the mainstream academic view is something else than I have explained at #Comments, WP:CITE your WP:SOURCES. Do mind that WP:MEDRS is binding for medical claims. tgeorgescu ( talk) 17:40, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 August 2023 and 8 December 2023. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Cmk21,
Flamenquera,
Bec1970 (
article contribs). Peer reviewers:
Wikistudent100,
Jtm20dc,
Haleymackinnon,
Jld20eo,
Alabamagold,
Kateburnstine.
— Assignment last updated by Iamclandestined ( talk) 04:25, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
Children who have been frequently exposed to explicit sexual content are more likely to engage in the behaviors and practices they observe. They are also more likely to express sexually coercive behaviors such as those depicted in pornographic material. Using pornography has also been associated with frequent sexting.
What the above ignores is that the large majority of teens (especially boys) use pornography. So, its stance is naive. Perhaps it was true in the 1900s, but it is no longer true. Pornography use has gone mainstream, so it is much easier to conclude that teens who never used pornography are mentally impaired, rather than its opposite. tgeorgescu ( talk) 04:20, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
Gail Dines is a sociologist. She is not qualified to discuss about brains (medically or psychologically). I'm not qualified to produce WP:OR about the brain, and neither is she. She should not be trusted, because she isn't an expert in brains. tgeorgescu ( talk) 13:10, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
@ Flamenquera: Are you doing serious scholarship or just flame baiting? tgeorgescu ( talk) 02:35, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
Should the category "Adolescent sexuality in the United States" be removed because the article is written from a global point of view, or should all the other countries (Canada, UK, Afrika, Asia,...) also be included? The Other Karma ( talk) 08:20, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
Given that the parent category - Adolescent sexuality - is already included, there doesn't seem much point in including them. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 13:03, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
In my opinion, the recent substantive edits to this article made by contributor The Other Karma, while clearly well-intentioned, are not an improvement, and are clearly indicative of writing by someone with an insufficient grasp of the English language. See eg the lede:
As of now:
The effects of pornography on young people refers to the impact of pornography on adolescents. It wasn't until 1973, particularly with the advent of internet accessibility, that the consumption of pornography by adolescents became a subject of rigorous scientific inquiry. But the precise classification of pornography remains a subject of ongoing debate. For teenagers, it has become a normal part of their lives due to easy accessibility and integration into their social circles. Discussing their experiences with pornography can be challenging for adolescents, as it's often seen as non-normative by society, which can lead to feelings of conflict, guilt, and shame.
Adolescents turn to pornography for learning amplified by insufficient sex education, arousal, mating motivations, coping mechanisms, alleviating boredom, entertainment, and to explore their sexual and gender identities. However, they may also encounter content that disturbs them. Without adequate support, they learn to navigate disconcerting material, developing the skills to seek out content that affirms their sexuality while avoiding that which causes discomfort. Without alternative narratives, they think it leads to harmful attitudes about women, sex, LGBTQ people, and people of color and unrealistic expectations. The use of pornography by adolescents is associated with certain sexual attitudes and behaviors, but causal relationships remain unclear. It is imperative to recognize that adolescents are not passive "fools" or "victims". The typical adolescent consumer of pornography is typically male, in advanced stages of puberty, sensation-seeking, and often grapples with weak or disrupted family relationships.
Version of 20th September: [3]
Sexual themes have become prominent in the media, print advertisements, television, video games and other child-friendly mediums. Children are more likely to come across sexually explicit material online intentionally or unintentionally. The large quantity of explicit sexual content online increases the likelihood of young people to experience early sexual debuts or to have sexual experiences at a young age. Young people who frequently engage with explicit sexual content, that exhibits violent and objectifying themes, are more likely to imitate risky and violent sexual practices and to be more accepting of sexual objectification in society. They are also more likely to perceive other people's values and worth solely based on sex appeal.
Explicit sexual material, particularly pornography, impacts young people's wellbeing, sexual practices, attitudes and social relationships. The exposure to explicit sexual content has been associated with addiction, poor self-esteem, devalued intimacy, objectification, increasing divorce rates and engagement in unprotected sex. The use of pornography has also been associated with discovering one's own sexuality, reducing repressed feelings about sex and sexuality, being more open-minded to how others express their sexualities and being more open-minded to diverse forms of sex.
Either way, knowledge about this topic is tentative, due to a lack of empirical studies. There is no evidence that watching pornography would be harmful to minors. Instead, there are many unfounded claims, suppositions, and speculations. Obstacles to performing such research are insurmountable, thus it could possibly never be known.
Similar poor writing can be seen elsewhere, and in my opinion it might be wise to revert to an earlier version. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 19:49, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
had been of political importance since 1715. Not least because this is an article about a topic of international concern, but also because the source doesn't even assert that Charles IV took action as a result of new-found 'political importance' in his realm. The 1715 claim is absurdly specific, and indicative of the broader problems I describe. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 20:15, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Protecting the youth from fornicating content in Austria goes back to the 17th century...What exactly that is supposed to mean would be anyone's guess. I note that similar concerns relating to poor language skills have been raised in by User:Mathglot in comments made today. [4] [5] AndyTheGrump ( talk) 17:58, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
@ The Other Karma: The article as it is now does not contradict the information you deleted at [6]. What you fail to see is that both can peacefully coexist inside the same article. tgeorgescu ( talk) 02:17, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
@ Arjayay thank you for reporting that, this sentence: "it's characterized as on itself reduced, from other life contexts solved" needs clarification, could you please elucidate your conclusion that I can provide an solution? The Other Karma ( talk) 20:37, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
I would say, "self-contained depictions of sexual acts, distorted in a graphic manner, and devoid of any external context of relationships in life". Mathglot ( talk) 11:43, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
This article cites a single article, Adolescents and Pornography: A Review of 20 Years of Research [8] extensively, and uses it to make a large number of generalisations about the article subject matter. This is clearly improper, given that the article in question goes into considerable detail to note the biases consequent to the limited research available:
In addition to the more specific shortcomings in the current literature on adolescents and pornography, there are four general biases in large parts of the research ). First, research suffers from a cultural bias. More than two-thirds of the articles we reviewed came from Europe, North America, or Australia. Moreover, 63% of the articles originated in only a handful of countries (i.e., the Netherlands, the United States, Sweden, Hong Kong/China, and Belgium). Although five of the articles we reviewed dealt with African countries, we do not have the same knowledge about Africa as we have about Europe, Northern America, and some Asian countries, notably Hong Kong/China and Taiwan. We still know nothing about adolescents and pornography in Central and South America, several Asian countries, Russia, and the Middle East (except Israel).
I note also that a similar issue may arise with other sources used. The first two in particular seem to be used for similar generalisations, and given that they are similarly literature reviews, must surely suffer from the bias noted. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 17:49, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
Came here as, like AndyTheGrump and Arjayay, I thought this was an... interesting nomination. This article has not far from two thousand words of prose on the history of pornography legislation in Austria, which seems insane. Should the section be cut and become Pornography in Austria? Frzzl talk; contribs 18:49, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
The article seems to be mostly about the effects (or non-effects) of pornography on its younger viewers. What about the effects on young people of participating in pornography? Surely they are far greater? Phil Bridger ( talk) 09:45, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
The Other Karma, you asked above how to improve it. Here are some thoughts about that.
I would start by eliminating section § Predictors from the article, or rename the article. The title of this article is "Effects of pornography on young people", and the meaning of the word effect is a result or outcome of a cause, that is, something that comes after. A predictor is something that comes before, and thus imho doesn't fit the topic of this article and therefore should not be included here. Alternatively, if you propose a change of title (a WP:MOVE, in wiki jargon) to "Young people and pornography" (or vice-versa), then "Predictors" would fit the topic and could remain. Mathglot ( talk) 03:10, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Next, I would eliminate section § History of the public debate in Austria because there doesn't appear to be anything there that has to do with the article title. Which is not to say it couldn't be used in the appropriate article, just not in this one, as long as it carries the current title. Mathglot ( talk) 05:50, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
That will leave the current section 6, § Effects of pornography, which, per MOS:NOBACKREF shouldn't be there at all, since the topic of the whole article is that, so the HW section heading "Effects of pornography" could be dropped, and all that H3 headers currently under it, could be promoted to H2. Mathglot ( talk) 08:49, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
P.S. for the record: The Other Karma's partial block was just converted to an indef, so he can no longer respond here. Despite other factors, that is unfortunate in one way, as it would have been good to hear and consider whatever points he may have expressed, regardless whether I or others agree with them or not. Mathglot ( talk) 23:37, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
@ Phil Bridger, Tgeorgescu, AndyTheGrump, and Arjayay: Please have a look at the latest version; I'm looking for review or feedback from concerned editors at this article. A week has passed, and I've made the edits I proposed above starting with two large cuts. This was followed by a reorganization of the section structure and section names, as well as moving content around. Other than the two initial cuts and chopping the first paragraph of the lead, I removed little else.
Other edits involved moving stuff around with a goal of rationalizing the overall section structure and leave a comprehensible structure that would be a good jumping-off point for further improvement. There is no doubt lots of bloat that still needs attention, the lead needs a rewrite, and there is still plenty of poor syntax and translated-sounding text; none of my edits dealt with this comment of Andy's, so the whole article still needs copyediting. Hope you like it, and have at it! Thanks, Mathglot ( talk) 08:26, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
![]() | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Effects of pornography on young people article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline
Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically
review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Effects of pornography on young people.
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
![]() |
|
Hi! I just moved this article from my draft space. Hoping to receive feedback to further improve it. Also, would anyone know how to fix the formatting of my references? The reference links seem to go beyond the reference borders and overlap other references. Csan6227 ( talk)
I added a review article indexed for MEDLINE (gold standard according to WP:MEDRS), which basically says we know nothing about it, just speculating about this topic, due to a lack of empirical studies. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 08:30, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Note that I do not say that harmful to minors
would be a false claim. In order to affirm that, I would need to have evidence against it, and this is exactly the point: there is no evidence for or against it, due to a lack of research.
Tgeorgescu (
talk) 08:02, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
So, the claim that watching pornography would be harmful to minors is not scientific, since science posits facts and theories based upon evidence. That pretense could belong to the ethics of some religion (i.e. non-science), but when stated as if it were scientific, it amounts to pseudoscience.
And there is an ethical reason why such research is lacking: research ethics committees will never authorize such empirical research. So, it is likely that we will never know.
The only way to know is scientific research, and such research is not allowed. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 02:58, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
To all who disagree with my statements above: show me your WP:MEDRS. tgeorgescu ( talk) 01:16, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
See https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/group/american-college-pediatricians . Wikipedia does not WP:SOAP for such hate groups. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 21:51, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi, The Other Karma, as you see my approach is: don't delete stuff I don't like, but instead supplement it with the mainstream academic view. If you think that the mainstream academic view is something else than I have explained at #Comments, WP:CITE your WP:SOURCES. Do mind that WP:MEDRS is binding for medical claims. tgeorgescu ( talk) 17:40, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 August 2023 and 8 December 2023. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Cmk21,
Flamenquera,
Bec1970 (
article contribs). Peer reviewers:
Wikistudent100,
Jtm20dc,
Haleymackinnon,
Jld20eo,
Alabamagold,
Kateburnstine.
— Assignment last updated by Iamclandestined ( talk) 04:25, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
Children who have been frequently exposed to explicit sexual content are more likely to engage in the behaviors and practices they observe. They are also more likely to express sexually coercive behaviors such as those depicted in pornographic material. Using pornography has also been associated with frequent sexting.
What the above ignores is that the large majority of teens (especially boys) use pornography. So, its stance is naive. Perhaps it was true in the 1900s, but it is no longer true. Pornography use has gone mainstream, so it is much easier to conclude that teens who never used pornography are mentally impaired, rather than its opposite. tgeorgescu ( talk) 04:20, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
Gail Dines is a sociologist. She is not qualified to discuss about brains (medically or psychologically). I'm not qualified to produce WP:OR about the brain, and neither is she. She should not be trusted, because she isn't an expert in brains. tgeorgescu ( talk) 13:10, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
@ Flamenquera: Are you doing serious scholarship or just flame baiting? tgeorgescu ( talk) 02:35, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
Should the category "Adolescent sexuality in the United States" be removed because the article is written from a global point of view, or should all the other countries (Canada, UK, Afrika, Asia,...) also be included? The Other Karma ( talk) 08:20, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
Given that the parent category - Adolescent sexuality - is already included, there doesn't seem much point in including them. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 13:03, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
In my opinion, the recent substantive edits to this article made by contributor The Other Karma, while clearly well-intentioned, are not an improvement, and are clearly indicative of writing by someone with an insufficient grasp of the English language. See eg the lede:
As of now:
The effects of pornography on young people refers to the impact of pornography on adolescents. It wasn't until 1973, particularly with the advent of internet accessibility, that the consumption of pornography by adolescents became a subject of rigorous scientific inquiry. But the precise classification of pornography remains a subject of ongoing debate. For teenagers, it has become a normal part of their lives due to easy accessibility and integration into their social circles. Discussing their experiences with pornography can be challenging for adolescents, as it's often seen as non-normative by society, which can lead to feelings of conflict, guilt, and shame.
Adolescents turn to pornography for learning amplified by insufficient sex education, arousal, mating motivations, coping mechanisms, alleviating boredom, entertainment, and to explore their sexual and gender identities. However, they may also encounter content that disturbs them. Without adequate support, they learn to navigate disconcerting material, developing the skills to seek out content that affirms their sexuality while avoiding that which causes discomfort. Without alternative narratives, they think it leads to harmful attitudes about women, sex, LGBTQ people, and people of color and unrealistic expectations. The use of pornography by adolescents is associated with certain sexual attitudes and behaviors, but causal relationships remain unclear. It is imperative to recognize that adolescents are not passive "fools" or "victims". The typical adolescent consumer of pornography is typically male, in advanced stages of puberty, sensation-seeking, and often grapples with weak or disrupted family relationships.
Version of 20th September: [3]
Sexual themes have become prominent in the media, print advertisements, television, video games and other child-friendly mediums. Children are more likely to come across sexually explicit material online intentionally or unintentionally. The large quantity of explicit sexual content online increases the likelihood of young people to experience early sexual debuts or to have sexual experiences at a young age. Young people who frequently engage with explicit sexual content, that exhibits violent and objectifying themes, are more likely to imitate risky and violent sexual practices and to be more accepting of sexual objectification in society. They are also more likely to perceive other people's values and worth solely based on sex appeal.
Explicit sexual material, particularly pornography, impacts young people's wellbeing, sexual practices, attitudes and social relationships. The exposure to explicit sexual content has been associated with addiction, poor self-esteem, devalued intimacy, objectification, increasing divorce rates and engagement in unprotected sex. The use of pornography has also been associated with discovering one's own sexuality, reducing repressed feelings about sex and sexuality, being more open-minded to how others express their sexualities and being more open-minded to diverse forms of sex.
Either way, knowledge about this topic is tentative, due to a lack of empirical studies. There is no evidence that watching pornography would be harmful to minors. Instead, there are many unfounded claims, suppositions, and speculations. Obstacles to performing such research are insurmountable, thus it could possibly never be known.
Similar poor writing can be seen elsewhere, and in my opinion it might be wise to revert to an earlier version. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 19:49, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
had been of political importance since 1715. Not least because this is an article about a topic of international concern, but also because the source doesn't even assert that Charles IV took action as a result of new-found 'political importance' in his realm. The 1715 claim is absurdly specific, and indicative of the broader problems I describe. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 20:15, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Protecting the youth from fornicating content in Austria goes back to the 17th century...What exactly that is supposed to mean would be anyone's guess. I note that similar concerns relating to poor language skills have been raised in by User:Mathglot in comments made today. [4] [5] AndyTheGrump ( talk) 17:58, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
@ The Other Karma: The article as it is now does not contradict the information you deleted at [6]. What you fail to see is that both can peacefully coexist inside the same article. tgeorgescu ( talk) 02:17, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
@ Arjayay thank you for reporting that, this sentence: "it's characterized as on itself reduced, from other life contexts solved" needs clarification, could you please elucidate your conclusion that I can provide an solution? The Other Karma ( talk) 20:37, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
I would say, "self-contained depictions of sexual acts, distorted in a graphic manner, and devoid of any external context of relationships in life". Mathglot ( talk) 11:43, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
This article cites a single article, Adolescents and Pornography: A Review of 20 Years of Research [8] extensively, and uses it to make a large number of generalisations about the article subject matter. This is clearly improper, given that the article in question goes into considerable detail to note the biases consequent to the limited research available:
In addition to the more specific shortcomings in the current literature on adolescents and pornography, there are four general biases in large parts of the research ). First, research suffers from a cultural bias. More than two-thirds of the articles we reviewed came from Europe, North America, or Australia. Moreover, 63% of the articles originated in only a handful of countries (i.e., the Netherlands, the United States, Sweden, Hong Kong/China, and Belgium). Although five of the articles we reviewed dealt with African countries, we do not have the same knowledge about Africa as we have about Europe, Northern America, and some Asian countries, notably Hong Kong/China and Taiwan. We still know nothing about adolescents and pornography in Central and South America, several Asian countries, Russia, and the Middle East (except Israel).
I note also that a similar issue may arise with other sources used. The first two in particular seem to be used for similar generalisations, and given that they are similarly literature reviews, must surely suffer from the bias noted. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 17:49, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
Came here as, like AndyTheGrump and Arjayay, I thought this was an... interesting nomination. This article has not far from two thousand words of prose on the history of pornography legislation in Austria, which seems insane. Should the section be cut and become Pornography in Austria? Frzzl talk; contribs 18:49, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
The article seems to be mostly about the effects (or non-effects) of pornography on its younger viewers. What about the effects on young people of participating in pornography? Surely they are far greater? Phil Bridger ( talk) 09:45, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
The Other Karma, you asked above how to improve it. Here are some thoughts about that.
I would start by eliminating section § Predictors from the article, or rename the article. The title of this article is "Effects of pornography on young people", and the meaning of the word effect is a result or outcome of a cause, that is, something that comes after. A predictor is something that comes before, and thus imho doesn't fit the topic of this article and therefore should not be included here. Alternatively, if you propose a change of title (a WP:MOVE, in wiki jargon) to "Young people and pornography" (or vice-versa), then "Predictors" would fit the topic and could remain. Mathglot ( talk) 03:10, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Next, I would eliminate section § History of the public debate in Austria because there doesn't appear to be anything there that has to do with the article title. Which is not to say it couldn't be used in the appropriate article, just not in this one, as long as it carries the current title. Mathglot ( talk) 05:50, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
That will leave the current section 6, § Effects of pornography, which, per MOS:NOBACKREF shouldn't be there at all, since the topic of the whole article is that, so the HW section heading "Effects of pornography" could be dropped, and all that H3 headers currently under it, could be promoted to H2. Mathglot ( talk) 08:49, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
P.S. for the record: The Other Karma's partial block was just converted to an indef, so he can no longer respond here. Despite other factors, that is unfortunate in one way, as it would have been good to hear and consider whatever points he may have expressed, regardless whether I or others agree with them or not. Mathglot ( talk) 23:37, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
@ Phil Bridger, Tgeorgescu, AndyTheGrump, and Arjayay: Please have a look at the latest version; I'm looking for review or feedback from concerned editors at this article. A week has passed, and I've made the edits I proposed above starting with two large cuts. This was followed by a reorganization of the section structure and section names, as well as moving content around. Other than the two initial cuts and chopping the first paragraph of the lead, I removed little else.
Other edits involved moving stuff around with a goal of rationalizing the overall section structure and leave a comprehensible structure that would be a good jumping-off point for further improvement. There is no doubt lots of bloat that still needs attention, the lead needs a rewrite, and there is still plenty of poor syntax and translated-sounding text; none of my edits dealt with this comment of Andy's, so the whole article still needs copyediting. Hope you like it, and have at it! Thanks, Mathglot ( talk) 08:26, 6 February 2024 (UTC)