This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
This page needs archiving. Some items are now dormant. Any preferences for method, or is cut-and-paste OK? Mish ( talk) 21:27, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Had a look at MiszaBot config, and it is set to archive at 30 days. As this page is quite full, are there any objections to my downing it to 15 days? Mish ( talk) 01:32, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
before I begin building a formal proposal, could I have an idea of whether there are any strong objections to this, please? Mish ( talk) 14:19, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
somebody has corrected 'identitary' to read 'identity', I did wonder about it when I saw it, as it was a new one on me. The word does not turn up in the Oxford, Cambridge or Miriam-Webster Dictionaries. However, doing a google turns up 185,000 instances of the word, so it can't be a mistake, poor spelling or accidental - it doesn't suggest 'identity' instead as per misspelling. The context always appears the same as this case. I'm not too bothered about it, but should we revert it back seeing how somebody went to the trouble of putting it in there? Mish ( talk) 01:31, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
I was searching for LGBT health, and discovered there is no article, but there is an article called LGBT issues in medicine, so I have set up redirects for LGBT health to that article, as well as Transgender health (also missing) to the relevant sections. I have suggested a small section for Intersex health that would point to this one, as well as suggesting replacing all the 'issues' simply with health. If anybody could help with that section it would be appreciated, bearing in mind that many of the issues will be dealt with in the relevant locations - however, it is an important topic that could cover some of the more general needs of LGBT people that can get lost in the interminable discussions about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin in some sections (could be irony, or maybe just sarcasm).
On this article, specifically, we were discussing the need to work on the medical section. I have canvassed for an illustration, but as yet nothing has been forthcoming. I do think it is important that people get the best possible information within the constraints of an encyclopedia, as it may be the first point of call for many people looking to find out about intersex - and that may be individuals or parents (and maybe doctors, who knows). I am not competent to impart medical information, and feel very strongly that is not my job, but I am happy to support those who wish to do so. I have been adding things to the social section as time allows and as things occur to me - but I think it would be good if we can get the medical section into better shape. As somebody with an interest in the sociology of medicine and sexuality, I think it is important that this does not simply cover a clinical and scientific view of intersex, but looks at the problems intersex people face and the decisions they may have to make throughout their lives, examining the options open to them and what the implications are. Perhaps that is beyond the remit of an article like this, but it would be good if we could make a start on presenting the basic information in a way that people can follow up references and links to access more information if they need it. At the moment the medical section is pretty thin on references, and I am reluctant to slap 'citation needed' all over it. Could we have some idea whether people are interested in working on that section still, please? Also, do people think the unreferenced section on Anglo Saxon terminology is valuable here - or would it be better relocated into Hermaphroditism? That would be my choice. Mish ( talk) 01:31, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to be able to read this article without having to see all those pictures. 209.86.226.33 ( talk) 12:45, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
I have removed one of them. Mish ( talk) 13:02, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
The ISNA site seems to no longer be active, which means that a lot of the material that uses that site as a source now has citations which are dead links. Does anybody know the best way to manage this? We can either remove the links, and leave those bits unsourced, which risks fact tagging at some point, or we can look for alternative sources. What do people suggest? Mish ( talk) 22:46, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
"Intersexuality in humans refers to intermediate or atypical combinations of physical features that usually distinguish male from female."
This needs to be supplemented with something about how this is usually understood to be congenital, involving chrmosome, morphologic, genital and/or gonadal anomalies, such as diversion from stereotypical XX=female or XY=female presentations, sex reversal (XY=female, XX=male), genital ambiguity, sex developmental differences, etc. Any suggestions? Mish (just an editor) ( talk) 17:13, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
someone with a penis and a vagina has only 1 orgasmic organ, or whatever you call it. So, basically, they can't just stick it in themselves and.........
The following is the current second sentence of Section 3.4.2 (Conditions): "Although there neither no less common chromosomal sex nor mosaicism/chimerism, but just the most common types (XY or XX), less common phenotypes still appear in such cases."
Is it me, or does this sentence not make sense? Even if there is some correct parsing of it that is technically grammatically correct, at the very least it's poorly worded, given that I'm a reasonably intelligent person and yet still haven't yet grasped it. I'd take a stab at re-wording it myself, but even after reading it several times, I am still unable to discern what it's saying or trying to say. 12.155.58.181 ( talk) 22:40, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
As an Intersex person I take MASSIVE offence at being reffered to as a "disorder". The term DSD was coined by just two Intersex people. It should not be considered mainstream or desired by Intersex people in general. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.171.192.5 ( talk) 00:12, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
There has been a report out from Blick that Caster Semenya might be intersexual, based on an Athletics South Africa sex test result. — Rickyrab | Talk 01:29, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
Do not list Caster Semanya as an intersex individual. All reports are from unconfirmed sources. Media sources do not count as actual sources. It is likely that Caster is an intersex individual but refrain from listing her until the official report from the IAAF is released. Listing rumors, speculation, unofficial information and in this case, non scholarly sources is in violation of Wikipedia.
Wikipedia = "Biographies of living persons must be written conservatively, with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid paper; it is not our job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives. The possibility of harm to living subjects is one of the important factors to be considered when exercising editorial judgment."
Noteworthy speculation in this case is in violation. The listing of Caster Semanya is based on SPECULATIVE reports and not official. Therefore, it is not respecting the subject's privacy and is contributing to the spread of titillating claims. It is also causing possible harm to the individual whose privacy has been violated with UNCONFIRMED reports.
Also, "When in doubt, biographies should be pared back to a version that is completely sourced, neutral, and on-topic."
These reports are unconfirmed and are NOT COMPLETELY SOURCED. Media outlets claiming to have "inside information" that Caster is an inter sex individual is NOT COMPLETELY SOURCED. In addition, since it is not completely sourced, it has potential to not be neutral. Listing Caster is in clear violation of Wikipedia rules. Please refrain from listing her until there is something that is completely sourced. Speculative reports claiming inside information is not such.
The image Ambiguous_genitalia.jpg (near bottom of page) has a subject line in this article that refers to the image as belonging to a "dead baby", yet the image information itself does not state this. This means at best, this is original research. More than likely, it is a weak attempt to justify the image, which is fine and doesn't need justifying. Either way, I don't have (or want) an account, and can't change the page to edit out the phrase "dead baby" out of the title as the page is semi-protected. I ask that someone else please do so, as it is inaccurate to use the term "dead baby", not supported by any evidence, and there is no reasonable rationale to include this uncited "fact" in the description of the image. tia. 98.26.254.61 ( talk) 23:04, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
This article seems to have a neologistic agenda; can we please stop using wikipedia for cliquish uses? 96.28.88.126 ( talk) 00:06, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
I've removed this image since it is clearly not from an intersexed individual, and I believe goes against what this article is trying to do.-- Cpt ricard ( talk) 01:04, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
I would ike to question the factual verity of some of the sexual conditions listed. The example I am going to use is Kallmann syndrome. It is a condition where a person has a lack of smell and do not produce hormones naturally. How does this relate intersexuality, a condition where a person is born with male and female genitals. Likewise, the Kallmann syndrome articles uses two examples of people, Jimmy Scott and Brian Brett who are not labeled as intersex people.
The phrasing of Kallmann syndrome states that it is an intersex condition, which highly implies that if you have this condition, you are intersex. Where is the source that states it is an intersex condition? Why is Kallmann syndrome never stated in its article as being an intersex condition or a form of intersex. I would like for this thought process to be used on the listed conditions as they can greatly affect a person's view. SandSan ( talk) 01:18, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Following on from the recent proposals for DSM-5, and in the light of a conversation with James on a different article, I have inserted a section on Gender Incongruence. I have inserted a link to a position statement from OII Australia on this issue, but need to declare that I am quoted at the end of their position statement. I am not currently a member of OII Australia. Mish ( talk) 14:47, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
This page needs archiving. Some items are now dormant. Any preferences for method, or is cut-and-paste OK? Mish ( talk) 21:27, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Had a look at MiszaBot config, and it is set to archive at 30 days. As this page is quite full, are there any objections to my downing it to 15 days? Mish ( talk) 01:32, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
before I begin building a formal proposal, could I have an idea of whether there are any strong objections to this, please? Mish ( talk) 14:19, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
somebody has corrected 'identitary' to read 'identity', I did wonder about it when I saw it, as it was a new one on me. The word does not turn up in the Oxford, Cambridge or Miriam-Webster Dictionaries. However, doing a google turns up 185,000 instances of the word, so it can't be a mistake, poor spelling or accidental - it doesn't suggest 'identity' instead as per misspelling. The context always appears the same as this case. I'm not too bothered about it, but should we revert it back seeing how somebody went to the trouble of putting it in there? Mish ( talk) 01:31, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
I was searching for LGBT health, and discovered there is no article, but there is an article called LGBT issues in medicine, so I have set up redirects for LGBT health to that article, as well as Transgender health (also missing) to the relevant sections. I have suggested a small section for Intersex health that would point to this one, as well as suggesting replacing all the 'issues' simply with health. If anybody could help with that section it would be appreciated, bearing in mind that many of the issues will be dealt with in the relevant locations - however, it is an important topic that could cover some of the more general needs of LGBT people that can get lost in the interminable discussions about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin in some sections (could be irony, or maybe just sarcasm).
On this article, specifically, we were discussing the need to work on the medical section. I have canvassed for an illustration, but as yet nothing has been forthcoming. I do think it is important that people get the best possible information within the constraints of an encyclopedia, as it may be the first point of call for many people looking to find out about intersex - and that may be individuals or parents (and maybe doctors, who knows). I am not competent to impart medical information, and feel very strongly that is not my job, but I am happy to support those who wish to do so. I have been adding things to the social section as time allows and as things occur to me - but I think it would be good if we can get the medical section into better shape. As somebody with an interest in the sociology of medicine and sexuality, I think it is important that this does not simply cover a clinical and scientific view of intersex, but looks at the problems intersex people face and the decisions they may have to make throughout their lives, examining the options open to them and what the implications are. Perhaps that is beyond the remit of an article like this, but it would be good if we could make a start on presenting the basic information in a way that people can follow up references and links to access more information if they need it. At the moment the medical section is pretty thin on references, and I am reluctant to slap 'citation needed' all over it. Could we have some idea whether people are interested in working on that section still, please? Also, do people think the unreferenced section on Anglo Saxon terminology is valuable here - or would it be better relocated into Hermaphroditism? That would be my choice. Mish ( talk) 01:31, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to be able to read this article without having to see all those pictures. 209.86.226.33 ( talk) 12:45, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
I have removed one of them. Mish ( talk) 13:02, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
The ISNA site seems to no longer be active, which means that a lot of the material that uses that site as a source now has citations which are dead links. Does anybody know the best way to manage this? We can either remove the links, and leave those bits unsourced, which risks fact tagging at some point, or we can look for alternative sources. What do people suggest? Mish ( talk) 22:46, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
"Intersexuality in humans refers to intermediate or atypical combinations of physical features that usually distinguish male from female."
This needs to be supplemented with something about how this is usually understood to be congenital, involving chrmosome, morphologic, genital and/or gonadal anomalies, such as diversion from stereotypical XX=female or XY=female presentations, sex reversal (XY=female, XX=male), genital ambiguity, sex developmental differences, etc. Any suggestions? Mish (just an editor) ( talk) 17:13, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
someone with a penis and a vagina has only 1 orgasmic organ, or whatever you call it. So, basically, they can't just stick it in themselves and.........
The following is the current second sentence of Section 3.4.2 (Conditions): "Although there neither no less common chromosomal sex nor mosaicism/chimerism, but just the most common types (XY or XX), less common phenotypes still appear in such cases."
Is it me, or does this sentence not make sense? Even if there is some correct parsing of it that is technically grammatically correct, at the very least it's poorly worded, given that I'm a reasonably intelligent person and yet still haven't yet grasped it. I'd take a stab at re-wording it myself, but even after reading it several times, I am still unable to discern what it's saying or trying to say. 12.155.58.181 ( talk) 22:40, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
As an Intersex person I take MASSIVE offence at being reffered to as a "disorder". The term DSD was coined by just two Intersex people. It should not be considered mainstream or desired by Intersex people in general. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.171.192.5 ( talk) 00:12, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
There has been a report out from Blick that Caster Semenya might be intersexual, based on an Athletics South Africa sex test result. — Rickyrab | Talk 01:29, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
Do not list Caster Semanya as an intersex individual. All reports are from unconfirmed sources. Media sources do not count as actual sources. It is likely that Caster is an intersex individual but refrain from listing her until the official report from the IAAF is released. Listing rumors, speculation, unofficial information and in this case, non scholarly sources is in violation of Wikipedia.
Wikipedia = "Biographies of living persons must be written conservatively, with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid paper; it is not our job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives. The possibility of harm to living subjects is one of the important factors to be considered when exercising editorial judgment."
Noteworthy speculation in this case is in violation. The listing of Caster Semanya is based on SPECULATIVE reports and not official. Therefore, it is not respecting the subject's privacy and is contributing to the spread of titillating claims. It is also causing possible harm to the individual whose privacy has been violated with UNCONFIRMED reports.
Also, "When in doubt, biographies should be pared back to a version that is completely sourced, neutral, and on-topic."
These reports are unconfirmed and are NOT COMPLETELY SOURCED. Media outlets claiming to have "inside information" that Caster is an inter sex individual is NOT COMPLETELY SOURCED. In addition, since it is not completely sourced, it has potential to not be neutral. Listing Caster is in clear violation of Wikipedia rules. Please refrain from listing her until there is something that is completely sourced. Speculative reports claiming inside information is not such.
The image Ambiguous_genitalia.jpg (near bottom of page) has a subject line in this article that refers to the image as belonging to a "dead baby", yet the image information itself does not state this. This means at best, this is original research. More than likely, it is a weak attempt to justify the image, which is fine and doesn't need justifying. Either way, I don't have (or want) an account, and can't change the page to edit out the phrase "dead baby" out of the title as the page is semi-protected. I ask that someone else please do so, as it is inaccurate to use the term "dead baby", not supported by any evidence, and there is no reasonable rationale to include this uncited "fact" in the description of the image. tia. 98.26.254.61 ( talk) 23:04, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
This article seems to have a neologistic agenda; can we please stop using wikipedia for cliquish uses? 96.28.88.126 ( talk) 00:06, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
I've removed this image since it is clearly not from an intersexed individual, and I believe goes against what this article is trying to do.-- Cpt ricard ( talk) 01:04, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
I would ike to question the factual verity of some of the sexual conditions listed. The example I am going to use is Kallmann syndrome. It is a condition where a person has a lack of smell and do not produce hormones naturally. How does this relate intersexuality, a condition where a person is born with male and female genitals. Likewise, the Kallmann syndrome articles uses two examples of people, Jimmy Scott and Brian Brett who are not labeled as intersex people.
The phrasing of Kallmann syndrome states that it is an intersex condition, which highly implies that if you have this condition, you are intersex. Where is the source that states it is an intersex condition? Why is Kallmann syndrome never stated in its article as being an intersex condition or a form of intersex. I would like for this thought process to be used on the listed conditions as they can greatly affect a person's view. SandSan ( talk) 01:18, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Following on from the recent proposals for DSM-5, and in the light of a conversation with James on a different article, I have inserted a section on Gender Incongruence. I have inserted a link to a position statement from OII Australia on this issue, but need to declare that I am quoted at the end of their position statement. I am not currently a member of OII Australia. Mish ( talk) 14:47, 18 March 2010 (UTC)