This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 2600:1700:84e9:1510:9565:8ecc:157b:fb49 (talk) at 16:40, 3 April 2022 (→Malicious edits: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 16:40, 3 April 2022 by 2600:1700:84e9:1510:9565:8ecc:157b:fb49 (talk) (→Malicious edits: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)LGBTQ+ studies C‑class | |||||||
|
Sexology and sexuality Start‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||
|
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fraternal birth order and male sexual orientation 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 |
Introduction
I wasn't convinced the introduction was a good summarization of the effect, so I wrote one which essentially covers everything important. It is a little long, so perhaps the last paragraph could be trimmed off and moved into overview. I have seen a lot of people dismiss the FBOE as quackery because they aren't aware it only occurs with biological older brothers. I think an introduction which covers the main points as to why it's thought to be a biological mechanism is important. Let me know if we can improve/trim this or if it's adequate in some form. I put it in a sandbox here. Happy for you to duplicate the paragraph in the sandbox, make changes, and then comment here which changes you made and why, or, just leave the comments here. Sxologist (talk) 02:14, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
- Okay, I made this edit in the sandbox. Actually, I see now you didn't invite me to do that specifically, but I have done that in a past collaboration with another editor. You can of course undo my edit and work on it from there if you want. Basically, I don't think we need to go into detail on how the mechanism works in the lead; that sort of thing is article body content. I also noticed that some of the content there does not exist yet in the article body here; that content should also be added to the body, per WP:LEADFOLLOWSBODY. (Other articles are not always good about following "lead follows body", but they should). Otherwise, it looks good to me. Crossroads 04:57, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
- That's totally fine – striking it is a good start. I *might* add a small extension on the last sentence about sexual differentiation of brain, and it should be pretty easy to fit in there. Agree on body of text. The body is a bit out of date and needs replacing with secondary sources. I'll wait and see what other editors say. Sxologist (talk) 05:38, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
- I have published a version two which is more simple but still captures the antigen associated. Sxologist (talk) 07:59, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
- Regarding this? I'll leave it to you two. At least for now. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 03:57, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
- Looks good to me. Thanks. Crossroads 05:30, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
- I have published a version two which is more simple but still captures the antigen associated. Sxologist (talk) 07:59, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
- That's totally fine – striking it is a good start. I *might* add a small extension on the last sentence about sexual differentiation of brain, and it should be pretty easy to fit in there. Agree on body of text. The body is a bit out of date and needs replacing with secondary sources. I'll wait and see what other editors say. Sxologist (talk) 05:38, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Malicious edits
There's a user going through and changing the gender and numbers related to the study this page covers. 2600:1700:84E9:1510:9565:8ECC:157B:FB49 (talk) 16:40, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
Categories: