Talk:African American transsexuality

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 01:00, 17 November 2006 (UTC). The result of the discussion was redirect to transsexualism.

Contents

[edit] Accuracy and neutrality

Listen here unless you are black and transsexual you can sy nothing to me about the accuracy or neutrality of this article.--Hfarmer 22:58, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps so, but Wikipedia in an encyclopedia, not a messageboard or a blog. Your "article" does not contain a single link to any other article, cites no sources, and reflects your personal experience and original research, which is not really what Wikipedia is about. I'm not saying what you have to offer it not valid, I'm pointing out that Wikipedia might be the wrong place. Have you considered rewriting the article so that it would be a proper encyclopedia entry, with sources to others' research and citations? 65.6.60.79 12:34, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Uh, how can this be neutral if it was written by a african american transexual, smacks of original research, and has no citations (save for two pro-transexual websites)? Pogo 05:25, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
"Pro transsexual websites" Well websites that are written by transsexuals would be the primary soruces on this matter. Plus an African American transsexual would be the most interested party to write such an article. Consider the articles on the Arab Isralie conflict. Is is no surprise that the writers are mostly Arab or Isralie. --Hfarmer 14:51, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Notice that the articles on the Arab Israli conflict are written on by both Arab and Israli writers? They are the most interested, and I can understand wanting to write a article on something you are/like, but it will most likely not be neutral. Pogo 19:28, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sourcing

I am working on finding sources for the articles staements. I have sourd sources that contain much of the informaiton I related here. The system seems to be having a problem right not for at this very moment the article will not fully process into a webpage when I save it or preview it. Hopefully this will correct itself soon. There would be nothing Ican do on my end with it.

Some statements here are common knowledge. Which is something like citing E = Mc2 it is un needed to cite "on the electrodynamics of moving bodies" as it's source. One can just go on ahead and use it. The fact taht black people are generally religiously conservative and have conservative social views seems to be common knowledge. So does the fact that psychologist are generally trying to be dispassionate and reasonable and are human beings capeable of racial bias just like anyone else. What else would they be?

So please bear with me. I am working on this. --Hfarmer 16:37, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

"Some statements here are common knowledge" The starting point for oringinal research... "the fact taht [sic] black people are genreally religiously conservative and have conservative social views seems to be common knowledge" I meet very few conservative african americans. I find many more liberal african americans. Also all of the content must be verifiable (wikipedia's rules). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view

[edit] Neutrality concern

I have placed a NPOV tag on this article. It is well-cited, however, citations are necessary but not sufficient to make an article neutral. The article still reads as though it is making claims and using citations to prove their truth, rather that citing claims to the sources that make them. Tuf-Kat 07:03, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This is supposed to be an article written by the authors..

not a collection of quotes about a subject from other sources. You seem to be complaining about the fact that what I have said is obvious to the blind if you are black. The exprience of being GLBT and even I is different depending on race linked cultural differences. The exposition of this fact is important to other articles on wikipedia about transsexualism. Such I why I created it.

There is nothing non neutral about the way this is written. I paraphrase and summarize sources instead of blandly quoteing them. --Hfarmer 01:20, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

This article, along with several others you have started, touch on important topics, but the style and POV is not within the policies of Wikipedia. Every statement needs to be backed with a citation. It's much better to quote than paraphrase, because there is less room for you to insert your own interpretation. These articles read as if they are from your point of view, rather than a neutral enecyclopedia article. That's what everyone here is trying to say-- this violated WP:NPOV and WP:NOR. If policy is being followed, it makes no difference who is contributing to this. To claim one has to be Black and/or transsexual to work on this is simply wrong. The whole point of Wikipedia is that you shouldn't be able to tell anything about the authors from the article. Jokestress 01:14, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AA transsexual info I'd like to incorporate in time

Jokestress 04:15, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Thanky for all you have done for this article. --Hfarmer 03:11, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Accuracy tag

I added this to the last section because it makes a lot of overbroad assertions that could use better sourcing and counterpoints. Some statements presented as univerally true need to be qualified and better sourced. Jokestress 17:24, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Moving to Transsexuality

I think, since this is a subset of transsexuality, that it should be a section there, instead of its own page. I'll let someone else do the actual dirty work, but I thought I might suggest it.Minidoxigirli 17:59, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

That would be a bad idea. Perhaps a link but nothing more. If a section is to be added then there need to be a secion on the way transsexuality presnts itself in every culture. There are lready equivalent articles like this on elsewhere in the Wikipedia such as two-spirit and Katoey etc etc. --Hfarmer 03:10, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Possibly it should be renamed "transsexuality among African-Americans" or something similar. As written some could believe this is an entirely different form of transsexuality called "African American transsexuality" rather than a differing cultural response/history of it among African Americans. I know this is likely sounding silly, but I've noticed that titles really have to spell things out as if you don't someone really will complain about confusion. Also the statement "their reproductive obligations to the race" concerns me a bit. Do African Americans really think in terms of reproducing for the sake of their race?--T. Anthony 18:30, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of data during AfD

User:Antonrojo has been removing a lot of published citations describing prevalence of transsexualism, which is somewhat problematic since this is up for deletion right now. In fact, it was nominated by the very editor deleting the citations, making it more liely the editor's nomination will succeed. Further, there is a considerable controversy over prevalence and clinical descriptions withing this population. Some reports claim it is rare/underreported, some claim it is consistent with other demographic metrics, and some claim it is much more prevalent.

I am going to add back in the reliable published sources unless there is some objection here. I agree that this article is pretty bad (especially the original research-laden last section), but I don't think it helps to remove data, especially by the editor who nominated it for deletion. Jokestress 20:48, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

I just added back the clinical data, and I'd like to discuss why the prominent African American authors and entertainers were removed from the history section. If there's not a good reason, I will add that back in as well. Jokestress 00:04, 13 November 2006 (UTC)