Talk:Intersex

This is an extremely poorly written article. There are ZERO citations, and this is a medical topic. There are weasel words and assertions of feelings as facts. This is not at the encyclopedic level. 208.58.192.92 (talk) 02:39, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So fix it. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:31, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

maybe make a section that talks about intersex people in culture. Frogger48 (talk) 01:02, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clean up the article[change source]

Since I was reported for cleaning up the article and adding citations needed perhaps someone else can do it. Things like "(though rarely)" and "(hormones that act like testosterone)" does not belong in an encyclopaedia. The part about intersexualism or hermaphroditism should reflect that the difference is made by sociologists and not biologists, or should be removed entirely. If it going to be claimed as a definite fact then it needs a source to back it up. Sources are needed throughout and I really do not understand how adding ^[source?] to the article is something which needs to be reverted and reported. Bonaventurepedia (talk) 15:24, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The editor is right, and I have added much needed sources, and changed some doubtful text. Macdonald-ross (talk) 16:02, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can this article be deleted?[change source]

This article is honestly appalling. It has extremely poor citations, and its suggestion that intersex people "appreciate" being operated on as babies is grossly bigoted. Additionally, it has no reason to exist, especially when the "Intersex" article on wikipedia already exists.— This unsigned comment was added by Aldepa01 (talk • changes) on 03:16, 16 June 2015(UTC).

Based on which Simple English Wikipedia guidelines or policies? If you find one or more sentences you feel do not meet Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (after reading the policy) please mention them here. As for sources, which do not meet Wikipedia:Reliable sources guideline? Again, if you would refer to the specific source citation(s) it would help in allowing editors to verify or correct it or them. Wikipedia is not censored. We don't hide or change facts that some may not approve of. There are several subjects which, although written in accordance with guidelines and policies, are nonetheless unpleasant subjects to some. But they should be accurate. If you see something specifically in this article that is not accurate, please list it here and if you could, cite reliable sources for your suggested change. Just a link to the source will do in a talk page. Lastly, we don't have an article titled Intersex. Our sister project, the English Wikipedia has such an article and it is very similar to this one. It is at en:Intersex. There are two English language Wikipedias. Is it possible you have confused the the English Wikipedia (abbreviated enwiki) with Simple English Wikipedia (simplewiki)? When viewing an article, look at the top left of the screen to see what Wikipedia it is you are viewing. It is possible to be redirected from one to the other without it being obvious. Sometimes a link in a simplewiki article is linked in the text to an enwiki article, which it shouldn't be. If you find such a link please mention it here. Thanks User:Rus793 (talk) 18:24, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The short answer is no, it can't be deleted. And I do not see the word "appreciate" in the article. Macdonald-ross (talk) 18:43, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have updated the article, using a range of human rights sources and medical journal articles. Trankuility (talk) 00:17, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Trankuility: I have to ask, reviewing your changes - It looks like there's a bit of POV pushing going on in the article such as the removal of the ISNA link from the references, and replacing properly cited material with opinions, such as, "A term used increasingly is 'disorders of sex development' (DSD)s" with "The clinical term 'disorders of sex development' (DSDs) is very controversial." This is going along with the other breadth of changes you are making to intersexuality-related articles, of which I am tempted to revert due to the POV pushing. Would you be willing to explain why you made the changes you have? Lithorien ^{Talk • Changes} 14:02, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have added numerous verifiable citations including from the UN, human rights and ethics institutions, and medical journal articles. Those citations are not me pushing a POV. They include, for example, United Nations for Intersex Awareness. The previous omission of such material was pushing a POV. The changes made more broadly are consistent, unlike previous assertions which simultaneously present intersex as a third gender and "increasingly" disorders of sex development. These assertions are not supported by any evidence. ISNA closed close to a decade ago, as stated on the archived website. Trankuility (talk) 14:11, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]