Wikipedia

Talk:History of bisexuality

Latest comment: 4 months ago by DParkinson1 in topic Too America Centric
Learn more about this page

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

edit
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

  This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2019 and 15 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Xli1218. Peer reviewers: Mkhurley19, Tmsloan.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:26, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

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

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

edit
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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.

edit
Latest comment: 5 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

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
I'm in agreement with Crossroads1. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 01:36, 13 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
Thank you so much for your advise! I will start working on editing this page shortly. You can visit my sandbox to read my draft User:Xli1218/History of bisexuality Xli1218 (talk) 00:29, 11 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

Peer Review of Article

edit
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Great job on your article! I thought it was very informative and I especially loved diving into the history of this topic as I was not familiar with it beforehand. I admired how you included translations and explanations of the Chinese characters that indicate that time frame's cultural view of bisexuality. This provided an interesting piece of information for the reader as well as contextualized the concepts being discussed. The biggest thing to address in the article would be the grammatical structure. There were many errors that muddled the delivery of the information. Specifically, verb tense agreement. When talking about historic events, the past tense is typically used but there were many instances of the present tense being used in reports of historic viewpoints/events. Editing this would make your at=rticle stronger, clearer, and more credible. Another key area is the lead. I loved how accessible the information was to the reader in its tone and use of language but I also felt it was too generic. Providing a definition of the topic as well as including summaries of the information that will be discussed would strengthen the article tremendously. Overall, great job. I could tell you put a lot of thought into the content of this article. Mkhurley19 (talk) 04:17, 31 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

Peer Review of Article

edit
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I've learned so much from your additions, you've done some great work here! You did an excellent job of providing a comprehensive overview of bisexuality in terms of its changing conceptualizations, meaning in language, and variance across cultures. In terms of suggestions, I recommend that you revisit the lead of the article and expand it to talk about the different aspects of bisexuality's meanings in a society/culture and how these meanings change throughout history. That way you'll be able to introduce the structure of the following article and its divisions along the lines of societies and time periods. Another improvement that you could make would include adding additional references to the stub sections you've edited and introduce the source before referencing it. But you've done a wonderful job, keep it up! --Tmsloan (talk) 15:38, 31 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

Lack of content

edit
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi, I’m new here and don’t really know how to edit yet, I’ve noticed that the English version of this page doesn’t treat ancient American cultures, as well as African, Oceanian, Scandinavian, European, Indian and Oriental history concerning bisexuality. I don’t know how i could help, but the French page treats all those cultures, i could try to translate it or at least help with it if no one else want to do so. The late alligator (talk) 15:43, 28 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Too America Centric

edit
Latest comment: 4 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

There's a huge section about American history, but it seems to be more reflective of Western culture as a whole? There are mentions of movements outside of America within this heading. It should be structured differently. CitrusCorduroy (talk) 21:23, 23 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

The "America" section seems to be more about the anglophone world than anything else. might that be a better title, with some trimming DParkinson1 (talk) 20:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:History_of_bisexuality&oldid=1234916793"