Talk:Sexual stimulation

message: I need help with citations, if anybody sees cross references or runs into articles and other resources on line, please help!~! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.223.61.209 (talk • contribs) 
Have a look at Foucault's History of Sexuality.  It will be of much help in refining this article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.55.146.37 (talk) 05:34, August 24, 2007 (UTC) 
Why are there no pcitures here..? Nothing at all? This article should be vastly improved.. -Alex  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.48.185.54 (talk) 18:14, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: You appear to have made great progress with editing this page! I have some potential alterations for consideration when developing the page further:
* The table within the sex differences in erogenous zones section is a great way to provide and display data. However, it may be a good idea to add more information to explain this table. Perhaps there are further reasons for these differences other than nerve endings? There could also be alternative information provided by Turnball et al (2014) that would be relevant here? 
* Further information and citations about orgasm control could be provided near the top of this page. Such as why and when this occurs. A citation may also be appropriate here.
* Are there any other images or tables that could be added to further enhance the page? Wikimedia Commons may already have something relevant you could add. 
* The history of sexual stimulation is briefly mentioned within the physical sexual stimulation section, however could this be added to further? It may be easier for readers to digest the information if 'history of sexual stimulation' had its own heading/section incorporating the history of sex toys and role-play use etc. 
* It may be useful to re-word the paragraph on dreams. Currently, the paragraph is hard to follow. It could help to separate the points about males and females more obviously. The points made here are also rather brief. Could more detail from the citations (e.g. Henton, 1967) be added to provide clarity and detailed understanding?
Overall, the page is well organised and structured. It covers a broad range of topics and incorporates many appropriate citations. This is a very interesting read and a good contribution! --JanWac (talk) 12:42, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you so much for your contributions! We have removed the initials sections involving words such as "fingering" we did not make those contributions in the first place but as you say it does not sound very neutral I think the page would be better without it. The history of sexual stimulation has also been removed. It was also not part of our contributions but we believe the page is more coherent without that section. We contributed to Physical sexual stimulation, Sexual stimulation through alternative routes and mental sexual stimulation. I agree with your comments though. We will look into adding images, I think it would make the page more engaging. Hopefully things are looking better now!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayselisa.allison (talk • contribs) 15:02, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you please explain the references to "we" and "our". Thanks  Velella  Velella Talk   06:20, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hello, Apologies, my fault for being so unclear! I worked on editing this page with two other colleagues. The first comment was from another colleague who was reviewing our work. I should have been more clear. Hope this clears things up  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayselisa.allison (talk • contribs) 13:54, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

text:  Thank you so much for your comments! You're right I think it's best to remove the citations. Unfortunately there have been troubles with finding an image that can be publicly shared but that'll be worked on. Thanks:)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayselisa.allison (talk • contribs) 13:56, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review

message: The overall structure of this article is extremely well organised, allowing for information to be easily accessible by the reader. To develop this further, there are a few suggestions which may be useful:
* The Non- genital stimulation section under Physical sexual stimulation contains a number of different body parts, such as lips and thighs. It may be helpful to write a short introduction before the content detailing these specific areas. An alternative option is to write a short summary at the end of the paragraph. This allows readers to recap the information within the section.
* The use of body parts as sub categories in Non- genital stimulation allows for easy comprehension, although for grammatical consistency “lips” needs to have a colon. 
* Throughout the article, numerous credible sources are cited. However, the names of researchers do not need to be included in the main body of text, and instead can be mentioned in the references. 
* The Excitation- transfer theory provides a well- balanced explanation for sexual arousal. However, it may be useful to first explain the general theory, and then apply it to the topic more specifically. For example, it could be useful to explain that the excitation left from a particular stimulus creates the response to another. 
* The use of headings and subheadings are well executed. Pictures and images will further enhance the overall layout of the article.
In summary this article is very well written, with a well organised structure. These are a few minor suggestions to an interesting read. Simi95 (talk) 21:25, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Peer Review

message: Hello,
I enjoyed reading your page, it really flows and clear and easy to follow the content. Here are some suggestions from me:
* You included a table under Sex differences in erogenous zones which makes the it very clear, organised and understandable.
* Maybe include a short subsection of history of sexual stimulation, which might make the article even better and more detailed.
* It might be useful to include some pictures or images of sex toys to let readers understand it better.
* There are many links to other Wikipedia pages which is really good, and the subheadings makes the page very clear and easy to read. 
Overall I really like the structure of your article and enjoyed reading the content of it, I think it is one of the best Wikipedia articles I've read!
Kkatieeee (talk) 17:15, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Peer Review

message: Hey, I thought your page was very concise and well put. It has a lot of good content thats both informative and appropriately written in the Wikipedia format.
Here are a few of my thoughts:
* Under the Genital Sexual Stimulation header, the point about sex toys is a great topic to bring in, however, it went on a bit of a tangent about the origins of the sex toy, rather than using the sex toys as a means of talking about genital stimulation. Possibly more about the benefits of sexual stimulation?
* In the Dreams section, there was a note about male erections accompanying all REM phases. It is said that as sleep nears its end, erections occur without the influence of arousal at all, but rather the result of increased blood flow during REM sleep. If that's whats implied, added detail would be good :)
* Under the Fantasy section, i liked that you talked about the motivator of transcending the social and safety limits. I thought maybe some additional information about the benefits of fantasy. That could possibly lead into potential costs of fantasy which would fit nicely with your part on Sexual Crimes.  
* Also under the Fantasy section, I enjoyed your point on the evolutionary generalisation of dominant men and submissive women. I saw that there was a mention of cultural influence, but it didn't get as much of a mention as the evolutionary explanation. Maybe an additional sentence or two regarding a sociological explanation?
I thought this article was very well done and I thoroughly enjoyed it :) Hopefully my points help!
Oliver Colin Arthur Butler (talk) 23:56, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Peer Review

message: Thanks everyone for the reviews and feedback we've received. We will be working on your points this week to improve the page. We really appreciate your help.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sara Jane Sutty (talk • contribs) 16:33, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thanks for Reviews 

message: — Assignment last updated by Lz2605 (talk) 14:35, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - SP23 - Sect 201 - Thu

message: — Assignment last updated by Zy175311460 (talk) 23:21, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Seminar in Human Sexuality