Talk:Castration

message: Do you think it might make sense to add some sort of protection to this article given that most of the recent edits have been different IPs removing material that is then readded? I don't think there's actually been a discussion here of this topic btw, so perhaps that should be had. But unfortunately I'm on the side of I'm lazy and it is sourced, so can't really represent the viewpoints of the people deleting content. Talpedia (talk) 18:01, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I requested such protection two weeks ago and it was declined due to “insufficient evidence of disruption”. You would be welcome to try again, however, as I agree. Jtrevor99 (talk) 18:11, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

message: There was a recent edit removing reference to internal testes on the ground that these were referring to ovaries. But I think this might be referring to intersex people who have features of female anatomy but have testes internally. See https://abcnews.go.com/Health/MedicalMysteries/story?id=5465752&page=1 Talpedia (talk) 10:31, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The edit was incorrect and I will restore the previous version in a moment. Many animals, such as elephants and porpoises, have internal testes and this term is correctly applied to those, as well as to humans or other animals with scrotums that have undescended testicles.  The editor misread the sentence. Jtrevor99 (talk) 14:47, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Internal testes 

message: I removed this edit:  as a potential copyvio. I have now come to the conclusion that, in fact, the book that publishes this text on the Internet probably contains unattributed copying from Wikipedia and as such there is no copyvio from that source. The edit does fall foul of WP:COPYWITHIN. It is copied from page history of another article on Wikipedia without attribution. It also had some other issues (not least that one statement had 40... yes, 40, sources cited. See WP:OVERCITE). As a copywithin, the text was not well suited to this page so please do not put it back in without discussion and a consensus here. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:04, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Came here to say this. It would be better to replace the 40 sources with one or two good, authoritative sources to improve readability. Anyoldguy (talk) 00:40, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: It is all undue. The page subject is castration, not the history of India. Information is due if it speaks to the general page subject (Hijra for instance) and it could be illustrative of castration of war captives, but this is a copywithin without any thought of how it improves this page. Copied material also must be attributed to the source per the Wikipedia license, and this copywithin was unattributed. I have removed it and per WP:ONUS, there would need to be a consensus for inclusion. I have thus deleted it again. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:32, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  India section 

message: The redirect Testicular ectomy has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 21:47, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Testicular ectomy]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: An IP has raised an issue with the first illustration on this page which is attributed in the caption to Sharaf ad-Din, a Persian scholar from Yazd, died 1454. As the IP notes, the text in the illustration is Turkish, and so looking at this, I believe the illustration is misattributed. This paper  describes the work of Charaf-ed-Din. Also known as Sharaf al-Dīn (Şerefeddin) Sabuncuoğlu as described in this paper  (died 1468). This latter was both surgeon and illustrator, and a number of his works, all in this style, can be found online. He lived in the Ottoman Empire during the fifteenth century and his Imperial Surgery, 1465, is the first illustrated surgical textbook written in Turkish. This must be from that. Putting this here to check my facts:
# Do we concur that these are two different people?
# Do we have a page for Charaf-ed-Din (died 1468) that we can wikilink to?
# If we don't have a page, I will red-link the attribution as he is notable. In that case, what is the correct form of his name that we should use?
Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 12:33, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Answered my own questions 2 and 3, thanks to the second paper I cited: Sabuncuoğlu Şerafeddin Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 12:37, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your attention to details. Cheers. 46.31.112.221 (talk) 12:14, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sharaf ad-Din 

message: The five edits since my last have involved a dispute over how to discuss oophorectomy, sometimes called "female castration," in the article. Editors have debated this same topic in the past, particularly in this section of the talk page archive. I encourage everyone to read the whole thing for the full context, but I would like to highlight and second the comment by Dfeuer that "While the ovaries are anatomically homologous to the testes, oophorectomy is not culturally equivalent to castration." Because of the differing sociocultural contexts, I think that this article should focus on orchidectomy, and that searches for the term "female castration" should be redirected automatically to the article on oophorectomy. (Edit: I just checked and discovered that the redirect already exists.) Huntthetroll (talk) 20:42, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Women and Castration Part 2