Jump to content

Talk:History of bisexuality: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Xli1218 (talk | contribs)
272 edits
Line 135: Line 135:
* Williams, Craigs A. 1999. Roman Homosexuality : Ideologies of Masculinity in Classical Antiquity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
* Williams, Craigs A. 1999. Roman Homosexuality : Ideologies of Masculinity in Classical Antiquity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[[User:Xli1218|Xli1218]] ([[User talk:Xli1218|talk]]) 15:01, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
[[User:Xli1218|Xli1218]] ([[User talk:Xli1218|talk]]) 15:01, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
:Regarding your review in the section above, I agree with your critique. This article looks like much, perhaps most, of it was copy and pasted from other articles. Regarding what you suggest now, aside from acknowledging the article has lots of room for improvement, I don't have much to suggest without anything specific. But, I would like to point out that any claims that relate to human psychology will need to be compliant with [[WP:MEDRS]]. For example, [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301639075 this] review states: {{tq|There is no persuasive evidence that the rate of same-sex attraction has varied much across time or place...We expect that in all cultures the vast majority of individuals are sexually predisposed exclusively to the other sex (i.e., heterosexual) and that only a minority of individuals are sexually predisposed (whether exclusively or non-exclusively) to the same sex.}} [[User:Crossroads1|'''''-Crossroads-''''']] ([[User talk:Crossroads1|talk]]) 17:29, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:29, 12 September 2019

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on History of bisexuality. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:30, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on History of bisexuality. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:10, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

POV

Geez. I just glanced at this article and the opening lines have some SERIOUS POV issues. The "history" section for Rome and Greece are also similarly WAAAY to assertive about how much we know of ancient Greek and Roman thoughts on sexuality. The sexuality, and especially homosexuality of ancient Western cultures is far from settled. I say all of this as a bisexual dude who mostly agrees with the assertions... they just need to be toned down a bit and be a bit more neutral. -Random bisexual dude. 209.6.42.124 (talk) 01:15, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This is what the article looked like at the time of the comment by the IP. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 13:36, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Globalization

Looks like we have the entire History of Bisexuality in the United States copied and pasted here and nothing about modern bisexual movements or people in other parts of the world. Could use some work. ABF99 (talk) 08:59, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on History of bisexuality. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:00, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on History of bisexuality. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:26, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Review on lead paragraph, structure and organization, and sources

Lead Paragraph

Review: The lead began with "This is an article about...", which is a filler sentence that needs to be edited as the title already shows what this Wikipedia article is about. The introductory paragraph seems like a paragraph from a op-ed the author wrote instead of a neutral POV introduction for Wikipedia. Most of he information included are either unrelated to the topic or not mentioned again in the article. The claims made in the introduction (i.e. "non-heterosexuality being seen as less worthy than heterosexuality") are strongly opinionated and are not supported by any facts or references.

Suggestions: 1. Some words and phrases might introduce biased or unsupported claims: "in many cultures", "absolutely", "in many cases", "arguably", "researchers". Edit these words or rephrase the sentences by stating more facts instead of opinions. 2. The lead paragraph should include an overview of the structure and main topics, especially for article about history in different parts of the world and different periods of time.

Structure and Organization

Review: In general, there is an imbalance of topics and contents covered in this article. For example, in "Ancient Japan" section, the texts includes more factual information and references although POV issues are still present, however, in "Ancient Greece" and "Ancient Rome" sections, the tone is too assertive without adequate support from different sources. Besides, the section "Freud and Jung" should not be parallel with sections about ancient civilizations as their theory only represents a western, psychoanalytical point of view in 20th century United States.

Suggestions: 1. The "Timeline of bisexual history" section represents neither the world history of bisexuality nor the ancient history of bisexuality (the time before the word "bisexuality" was coined). Besides, it reiterates most of the content in the section for U.S. history of bisexuality. Therefore, the content should be edited to avoid reiteration and/or the name should be edited to avoid misleading readers. (some ideas on the name: "The Timeline of U.S. Bisexual History", "The Timeline of Modern Bisexual History", or "The Timeline of U.S. Bisexuality Movement History") 2. Freud and Jung's theory is over represented in this article while other views on bisexuality are not presented. Different views and theory of bisexuality throughout history should also be given some weight as Freud's. It might be best to create a section for "history of theorizing bisexuality" and present works by different people on bisexuality.

Source and Reference

Review: Most of the sources can be accessed. A majority of the sources cited are either news articles or articles retrieved from some magazines. The article seems to rely heavily on sources from one source BiNetUSA, referencing its articles more than 50 times. There is also a general lack of historical sources regarding bisexual history in Ancient Greece, Ancient Rome, and Ancient Japan compared to the vast majority of sources related to U.S. Bisexual movement history.

Suggestions: 1. Sources should be more balanced (a diverse set of reliable sources and similar amount of references in each section)

Note: this is the version I reviewed. (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:History_of_bisexuality&oldid=808769884). Xli1218 (talk) 02:42, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I would like to edit this page, please let me know if you have any suggestions and comments.

I am interested in revising History of Bisexuality because LGBT history, especially the part of history before the terms are coined in Western countries, is extremely obscure and has not been explored much in Wikipedia. Although the notion that sexual orientation as an identity is a recent development, LGBT people’s presences are across countries and history. The Wikipedia article failed to provide sufficient and objective information about the history of bisexuality, especially bisexuality in ancient civilization and modern history in other countries. The article made a lot of questionable claims about history of bisexuality without any support from academic sources. I have already posted a critic of the article in the talk page. Some detailed revising plans will be posted in the following weeks. Here's some academic sources I've found.

Bibliography

  • Angelides, Steven. 2001. A History of Bisexuality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Cantarella, Eva. 1992. Bisexuality in the ancient world. New Haven: Yale University Press.
  • Dodge, Brian, Michael Reece, and Paul H. Gebhard. 2008. "Kinsey and Beyond: Past, Present, and Future Considerations for Research on Male Bisexuality." Journal of Bisexuality 175-189.
  • Duberman, Martin Bauml, Martha Vicinus, and Jr. George Chauncey. 1989. Hidden from History: Reclaiming the Gay and Lesbian Past. Penguin Random House .
  • Hinsch, Bret. 1990. Passions of the Cut Sleeve: The Male Homosexual Tradition in China. Berkley : University of California Press.
  • MacDowall, Lachlan. 2009. "Historicising Contemporary Bisexuality." Journal of Bisexuality 3-15.
  • Stein, Marc. 2003. Encyclopedia of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender history in America Marc Stein, editor in chief. Farmington Hills : Gale, Cengage Learning.
  • van Alphen, Elise C. J. 2017. "Erasing Bisexual Identity: The Visibility and Invisibility of Bisexuality as a Sexual Identity in the Dutch Homosexual Movement, 1946-1972." Journal of Homosexuality 273-288.
  • We are Everywhere: A Fiveway Review of A History of Bisexuality, Open, Becoming Visible, Bisexual Spaces, and Look Both Ways. 2009. "Alexander, Jonathan; Anderlini-D'Onofrio, Serena ." Journal of Bisexuality 461-476.
  • Williams, Craigs A. 1999. Roman Homosexuality : Ideologies of Masculinity in Classical Antiquity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Xli1218 (talk) 15:01, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your review in the section above, I agree with your critique. This article looks like much, perhaps most, of it was copy and pasted from other articles. Regarding what you suggest now, aside from acknowledging the article has lots of room for improvement, I don't have much to suggest without anything specific. But, I would like to point out that any claims that relate to human psychology will need to be compliant with WP:MEDRS. For example, this review states: There is no persuasive evidence that the rate of same-sex attraction has varied much across time or place...We expect that in all cultures the vast majority of individuals are sexually predisposed exclusively to the other sex (i.e., heterosexual) and that only a minority of individuals are sexually predisposed (whether exclusively or non-exclusively) to the same sex. -Crossroads- (talk) 17:29, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:History_of_bisexuality&oldid=915342198"