Jump to content

Talk:Circumcision

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Garycompugeek (talk | contribs) at 21:47, 28 February 2017 (→No major medical organization bans the procedure.: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Good articleCircumcision has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 3, 2013Peer reviewReviewed
February 12, 2013Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article


Toolbox

Danish Medical Association

Major doctors association comes out against forced circumcision of boys regarding medical ethics. Should we include something about this? [1] Prcc27🎃 (talk) 19:24, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What do you proposing adding? The ref says "Danish Medical Association stopped short of calling for a legal ban, saying it would be difficult to predict the consequences."Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:58, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Antijewish/Anti-Muslim Stances in German Article on Circumcision

In this Article circumcision is said to have emerged from a Kybele ritual castration, based on a theory of some turkish Urologist but without other sources. Protesting against this leads to a discussion with someone (TrueBlue) speaking of "genitale Schnippeleien" common between castration and circumcision, which I see as POV - to express it an a very mild way. (Probably this will be understood without knowing the German language. Schnippeln means cutting but in a sarcastic seemingly-funny context.) Attempts to remove this in my opinion wild theory (something a bit similar is part of english article too, but its expressed in a less provocative manner, rather neutral) result in savinbg the article from editing bei IPs for 6 months. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.104.179.233 (talk) 00:04, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is the English article - if your comment is about the German article, shouldn't it be on the German wiki? sheridan (talk) 05:11, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Newer prevalence data

From 2016 from which to build a map https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4772313/ Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:25, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seeking consensus on the prevalence map

Male circumcision prevalence by country, according to sources from Circumcision Reference and Commentary Service:[1]

References

  1. ^ "Male circumcision: Global trends and determinants of prevalence, safety and acceptability" (HTML). Circumcision Reference and Commentary Service. 2015.

This newer map has now been added to the article 5+ times. My opinion is that it is not acceptable for two reasons: it does not draw on a reliable source (blogspot), and the colours are prejudicial. Given I and others have reverted the addition multiple times it appears the consensus is not appropriate. However, given the risk of being drawn into an edit war I would welcome opinions to establish the true consensus regarding this file. BW |→ Spaully τ  16:25, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The blogspot source statistics are credited to 'Circumcision Reference and Commentary Service ', which as far as I can tell does not exist. We should stick with the older WHO source until some kind soul generates a new map from the data Doc James has linked in the section currently above this one. Also see Prevalence of circumcision, where a parallel edit war has been playing out. - MrOllie (talk) 16:33, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No opinion on the map but there is a sock farm involving JimmyNeutron2016 and various IPs that has been edit warring this and other content over several articles. Just bringing it to your attention because the multiple accounts can create a false impression of support. --Laser brain (talk) 17:17, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The WHO map is reliable. The data Doc James provided is from Brian Morris, a strong circumcision advocate, so I would be wary of bias there. There is little wrong, in my opinion, with the 2007 WHO map. --TBM10 (talk) 20:28, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes agree maybe best to stick with WHO data until they update it. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:47, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion to publishers or writers or researchers of this article

There should be some sort of note included in this article to suggest to readers to visit some sort of Health Organization website for healthy tips for safe sexual practices in order to prevent STDs. I assume this method is not 100% safe for preventing all types of STDs. Or perhaps a note indicating it is always advised to take appropriate safety measures, other than just depend on circumcision to prevent STDs.

No major medical organization bans the procedure.

This is simply untrue and easily verifiable. I've listed The Royal Dutch Medical Association and there plenty of others. First Doc James reverted this and then Sizeofint followed up saying the article doesn't even say that when it clearly does??? I'll put it in bold for you below "No major medical organization recommends either universal circumcision for all males (aside from the recommendations of the World Health Organization (WHO) for areas with high rates of HIV), or banning the procedure." Now please revert yourself.  g@rycompugeek  talk 21:47, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Circumcision&oldid=767947390"