Revision as of 05:39, 13 June 2018 editFlyer22 Frozen (talk | contribs)365,630 editsm →WP:MEDRS← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:44, 13 June 2018 edit undoFeliciapulo (talk | contribs)375 edits →WP:MEDRSNext edit → | ||
Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
:::] I'm a little bit confused, I looked at the ] page. Both of those sources I used were found in published journals, and were listed as peer-reviewed, so not original research. What about the item that sources an article from The Guardian only? Is there a reason why this piece is ok and these journal articles were not? ] (]) 05:33, 13 June 2018 (UTC) | :::] I'm a little bit confused, I looked at the ] page. Both of those sources I used were found in published journals, and were listed as peer-reviewed, so not original research. What about the item that sources an article from The Guardian only? Is there a reason why this piece is ok and these journal articles were not? ] (]) 05:33, 13 June 2018 (UTC) | ||
::::], ] is not the same thing as ]. See what WP:MEDRS states about primary sources, secondary sources and literature reviews. Also, I don't work in "what about" terms. If something on the list is only sourced to '']'', then remove it. ] (]) 05:39, 13 June 2018 (UTC) | ::::], ] is not the same thing as ]. See what WP:MEDRS states about primary sources, secondary sources and literature reviews. Also, I don't work in "what about" terms. If something on the list is only sourced to '']'', then remove it. ] (]) 05:39, 13 June 2018 (UTC) | ||
:::::], I understand, it wasn't intended to redirect the conversation, it was only brought up because I was wondering if there was a reason why this was ok. I will remove it then. ] (]) 05:44, 13 June 2018 (UTC) |
Revision as of 05:44, 13 June 2018
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of paraphilias article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 6 months |
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Archives |
This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
A revert I'm unhappy with
I added the following at the outset: Recently-coined names for paraphilias (abasiophilia, algolagnia, etc.) typically have a Greek origin.
This was reverted by EvergreenFir because it was not documented.
Documentation is not required for items easily verifiable. Anyone who goes to a dictionary can see these terms are coined from Greek. Is a source saying so really required?
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Deisenbe (talk • contribs)
Microphilia
Primaltare, regarding this and this, what makes you think that this drmarkgriffiths source from WordPress passes WP:MEDRS? It does not. In fact, it does not even pass WP:Reliable source. You stated, "As it is an infrequent fetish, it is difficult to find direct academic studies pertaining to it." That should tell you something. Furthermore, as made clear at the Macrophilia article, women fantasizing about being sexual with giants is rare. Macrophilia is rare and doesn't have much in the way of academic sources either. Do stop adding microphilia to the list. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 16:56, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
- Flyer22 Reborn. I apologize for the inconvenience. I followed up by searching my school's academic database, and could not locate any recent and reliable academic studies pertaining to Microphilia. I will not attempt to add the entry again. Primaltare (talk) 17:31, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
- Primaltare, thank you. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 18:08, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
I can't find a name for this one
How would you call the fetish involving striped clothes? (not "stripper" related, I mean keeping the clothes on and these clothes have say, black and white stripes). It would be easier to find a partner if I could google this by its name if the name exists of course. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.48.135.221 (talk) 15:13, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Sourcing
Ryubyss, regarding this, we go by what the reliable source state. And ephebophilia usually is not considered a paraphilia. Notice that ephebophilia includes physical/legal adults in addition to those 15 and up? Read the sourced Ephebophilia article. It would have made more sense if you'd listed hebephilia, but, as the Hebephilia article makes clear, even hebephilia is debated as a paraphilia and mental disorder. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:06, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
I see you did include hebephilia, but, as indicated by what I stated above, it's not on the list for a reason. I suppose we could include a note about the debate surrounding it, like (I think) we did before, but still. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:11, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
WP:MEDRS
Feliciapulo, regarding this, see WP:MEDRS. That is why I reverted you. Do not add poor sources, including poor medical sources, to the article. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 04:54, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
- Flyer22 Reborn, no problem, I figured it out. I went back and looked for other sources. However, I am noticing that others on the list are using sources such as articles from The Guardian (Oculophilia). I also noticed one did not leave a source but did link another Misplaced Pages article (Pyrophilia), is this sufficient? Feliciapulo (talk) 05:21, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
- Feliciapulo, I reverted again. It doesn't seem that you took the time to read WP:MEDRS; for example, what it states about WP:Primary sources. I'll leave a note at the WP:Med talk page about this so that editors there might weigh in. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:27, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
- Flyer22 Reborn I'm a little bit confused, I looked at the WP:Primary sources page. Both of those sources I used were found in published journals, and were listed as peer-reviewed, so not original research. What about the item that sources an article from The Guardian only? Is there a reason why this piece is ok and these journal articles were not? Feliciapulo (talk) 05:33, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
- Feliciapulo, peer review is not the same thing as literature review. See what WP:MEDRS states about primary sources, secondary sources and literature reviews. Also, I don't work in "what about" terms. If something on the list is only sourced to The Guardian, then remove it. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:39, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
- Flyer22 Reborn, I understand, it wasn't intended to redirect the conversation, it was only brought up because I was wondering if there was a reason why this was ok. I will remove it then. Feliciapulo (talk) 05:44, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
- Feliciapulo, peer review is not the same thing as literature review. See what WP:MEDRS states about primary sources, secondary sources and literature reviews. Also, I don't work in "what about" terms. If something on the list is only sourced to The Guardian, then remove it. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:39, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
- Flyer22 Reborn I'm a little bit confused, I looked at the WP:Primary sources page. Both of those sources I used were found in published journals, and were listed as peer-reviewed, so not original research. What about the item that sources an article from The Guardian only? Is there a reason why this piece is ok and these journal articles were not? Feliciapulo (talk) 05:33, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
- Feliciapulo, I reverted again. It doesn't seem that you took the time to read WP:MEDRS; for example, what it states about WP:Primary sources. I'll leave a note at the WP:Med talk page about this so that editors there might weigh in. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:27, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
- All unassessed articles
- List-Class psychology articles
- Mid-importance psychology articles
- WikiProject Psychology articles
- List-Class Sexology and sexuality articles
- Top-importance Sexology and sexuality articles
- WikiProject Sexology and sexuality articles
- Unassessed List articles
- Unknown-importance List articles
- WikiProject Lists articles