Talk:Epicanthic fold

message: I wanna want to know what are the differences between Epicanthus and Monolids?
:It is usual to add new posts to the bottom, not the top, of a talk page. Epicanthus means 'around the corner [of the eye]'. An epicanthic fold is a fold of skin that tends to cover the corner of the eye. Monolid is a slang term for when there is no visible crease of skin between the upper eyelid and the eyebrow. Strictly speaking the two are separate features, though they often occur together. In Epicanthus inversus the canthus is covered, but there is often no monolid. Urselius (talk) 13:40, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Epicanthus vs Monolids

message: .."An epithcanthal fold...is the origin of the...term "mongoloid."''
: What does that mean?  A-giau 10:23, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Just guessing here, but mongoloid now means people with down syndrome and asians. They both have the epicanthal fold. Mongoloid first refered to Asians (Mongol +oid) a bit latter it was applied to down syndrome people because they looked a bit asian. Hope this helps.Itler005 22:30, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: First, it's Down Syndrome (in caps) and Asians (in caps). Second, for at least the last thirty years it has been unacceptable to call people with Down Syndrome "Mongoloids", a practice which is demeaning to both Mongols and those affected with Down Syndrome. Myles325a (talk) 03:10, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and should provide complete and accurate history and ideology of words and phrases which are relevant to an article. Should evolving standards of civility, tolerance, in deference to other cultural norms render an older word or phrase demeaning or politically incorrect, Wikipedia should not "rewrite" history, but rather, assume the modern norm is known or reference it parenthetically. Articles are written for a global audience and history has to be recorded accurately. It is more demeaning to whitewash over prejudices suffered by a group of people. Should the article regarding the Anne Carlsen Center omit any reference to the Crippled Children's School? 76.14.128.97 (talk) 17:22, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: An

message: The child in this photo does NOT have an epicanthic fold... Therefore this picture is inappropriate for this article and would best be removed. --69.216.135.167 17:56, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture of Child With Downs Syndrome 

message: I'm not going to add this, because I want to hear confirmation from somebody with a stronger anthropology background; but I have read before that the expression 'Irish eyes' refers to the tendency among Irish people to have whole or partial epicanthic folds. John F Kennedy had such a feature. (I did too when I was a child, though according to the article this is common among children who aren't of Irish descent as well.) QuartierLatin 1968 02:25, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Oz Clarke, Billy Davies, Louis Walsh - British/Irish people with folds, off the top of my head. 167.1.176.4 (talk) 07:28, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irish 

message: Epicanthoplasty is the name of the operation for reduction of Epicanthal fold. Blepharoplasty is the creation of a "double eyelid" from a "single".--Hontogaichiban 01:01, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Blepharoplasty" is a generic term for reshaping the eyelid. Perhaps you are referring to Asian blepharoplasty. -AED 17:36, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Epicanthoplasty 

message: I have resectioned the whole article for clarity's sake. I hope that this structure is better. I'm sure it needs some tidying up though etc...--Hontogaichiban 13:29, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major resectioning 

message: I'm wondering about the accuracy of this part. This is OR so far, but it looks to me as if Khoisan eyes don't fit the description of the epicanthic fold. They have no upper eyelid crease, but the fold goes the other way, covering the outer corner rather than the inner corner of the eye. See, for instance, the portraits at . 82.25.232.106 12:07, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Khoisan]]?

message: Do epicanthal folds restrict the field of vision at all? One of my schoolmates has extreme epicanthal folds and she seems to have vision problems related to these, while other asians with less pronounced ones do not. One recurring joke is that we can never tell if she's squinting at us.--Pewpewlazers 06:24, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Restrict vision? 

message: I don't think this picture really shows a good example of an epicanthal fold, and therefore I, perhaps temporarily, moved it here:
On the other hand, this might be a better example. Too bad it's not free to use. Mikael Häggström 18:12, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bad example 

message: I uploaded Image:Epicanthalfold.jpg. If you find it uncorrect, please change it. It's very easy. Just open it in Paint, copy the upper part to the lower and start painting! Mikael Häggström 06:21, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New picture

message: :In some parts of the English speaking world, the term "slanted eyes" or "Chinese eyes" is still in colloquial use, though it is widely considered offensive in urban areas.
What, so it's OK in rural areas?  Revised this whole para.  Rojomoke 11:05, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pejorative Terms 

message: There aren't sources for most of the ethnic groups listed, but the mention of Turks caught my eye (no pun intended).  I don't think I've seen a Turk with any epicanthal fold.  Ufwuct (talk) 14:50, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe it's a common trait among the Turkic people, though not the Turks (people of Turkey), because most people in modern Turkey are Europeans (Anatolians, Greeks, various Balkanites, etc) who were Turkicized, only a minority of them are pure Turkic. Edrigu (talk) 23:08, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Ethnic group examples

message: Please include a photo of a person who does not have an epicanthic fold, for comparison.  That would allow the reader to more clearly compare the specific features that make up the fold.  As it is, I see general features but still do not understand what the epicanthic fold is. -Pgan002 (talk) 18:18, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I second this Aurora sword (talk) 15:47, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

text: Yep! As soon as I saw the piccies on the page, I thought this needs a photo of an non-epicanthic eye alongside, and from the same perspective. Sure, you could say everyone knows what typical Western people's eyes look like, but it's not the same thing as having two pictures to look at where you clearly see where the differences lie. Myles325a (talk) 07:19, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Came here specifically to suggest this also. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 07:36, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please include photo of a person without epicanthic fold 

message: These evolutionary theories are not commonly held and are not even referenced. They should be removed.
--Dneyder (talk) 03:13, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Evolution

message: The second photograph (the "Older East Asian Male") should indicate that the subject has East Asian eyes that lack the epicanthic fold.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dneyder (talk • contribs) 14:57, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: be bold and correct it yourself. I don't know if you're right because as it says on my user page, I'm totally blind. Graham87 15:41, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Epicanthic Fold

message: The majority of Asians do not have the fold , a " slit " is not an epicanthic fold.  The second picture was deleted because it was  of poor quality - obscure - and the fold wasn't prominent.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.98.64.117 (talk) 20:05, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The difference between an epicanthic fold and that of which can be ascribed to as the " slit " appearance 

message: The descriptive text and the existing photos don't help me to understand what an epicanthic eye-fold is in the first place. Maybe the article needs a diagram, or additional contrasting photos? JKeck (talk) 04:06, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  What IS it? Unclear 

message: It looks like this page used to have extensive discussion of epicanthic folds as a result of one's racial/ethnic descent, but that due to controversy it was removed.  Unfortunately, the current state of this page (that is, listing only neoteny and medical conditions) implies that having epicanthic folds is always a disease and is always abnormal.  Since this is not the case, I added a stub section back in about racial epicanthic folds. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zandperl (talk • contribs) 00:32, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That section was an uncited list of various Mongoloid peoples, so I removed it. It was original research. I will add a quote from Ashley Montagu who claimed it is found on Mongoloid peoples.--Ephert (talk) 00:36, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Racial epicanthic folds 

message: This article was linked on wikipedia's home page today: Did you know ... "according to controversial Romanian anthropologist Henric Sanielevici, the Chinese eye fold comes from chewing rice?"  There's no mention of that (absurd, to me) theory in the article, but it should be here, along with rebuttals made by other anthropologists.  Wikipedia is not a place for POV....  Here's what is currently there as a theory: "Although it has become quite a well known fact, that due to the sand storms and particles of sand being in the air, the eyes folded over on them self to protect the eyes from the sandy winds, a conclusive theory that has been debated many times, but seems the only logical way that natural selection has made the Homosapien evolve."  This is substandard.  24.27.31.170 (talk) 21:24, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rice....  

message: Why does this article use "Mongoloid" I thought it was derogatory and outdated. I changed one usage and will precede to change the others if no one minds.--JTBX (talk) 06:23, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: For what it's worth, I don't have any objections to that, but the older term is more succinct, and should probably be mentioned at least *once* because it was in such common use. But I don't know anything about this subject; this article is only on my watchlist to protect against vandalism . Graham87 14:00, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I also find the usage of the word "mongoloid" outdated and racist. I would update the word and the corresponding source with a more modern one. 64.189.101.117 (talk) 19:56, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mongoloid Term 

message: There was a picture of a currently living saami person with supposedly epicanthic folds in the article for quite some time. I removed, and still there is no source for saami or any other group having the folds at all. It's not even clear if the pictured person had epicanthic folds at all. Pleas refrain from using a vivid imagination when editing. Heracleidae-2013 (talk) 09:50, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Some British and Irish people also have this fold. See; Billy Davies, Oz Clarke and loads of others i can't think of right now. 2.217.255.31 (talk) 14:46, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source for Europeans with folds 

message: I am adding a section here regarding an edit by Rectipaedia made yesterday. The content removed is sourced. The edit summary indicates that a discussion was started; it was merely a response to a section created made six years ago. I'm going to restore this content. If this restoration is contested, please revert and let me know what I may be missing. Thanks. ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs)  03:06, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Update: done. ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs)  03:08, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of sourced content 

message: Seems to be confusion. The epicanthic fold is the fold of the upper eyelids which covers the inner corners of the eyes. It has little do do with the presence or lack of a eyelid crease of the upper eye-lid (which is a separate issue). Hence, the name "epi-canthus" (ie., "(upon)-(the corner of the eye)"). One can have an epicanthic fold while at the same time having a deep crease in the upper eyelid. More specifically, it is the fold of the upper eyelid folding over the inner corner of the eye (the rest of the eyelid crease can be present above the eyelid bottom anywhere else around the eye, however the epicanthic fold is specifically where it crosses the inner corner of the eye [below the lower edge of the eyelid]). Someone needs to research this topic better and correct and make clearer the article. At the moment, I think this article is just confusing people greatly. — al-Shimoni (talk) 17:51, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  It is the inner corner fold 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Epicanthic fold. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100112093315/http://health.allrefer.com:80/health/epicanthal-folds-info.html to http://health.allrefer.com/health/epicanthal-folds-info.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:23, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: What are the genetic bases of this eye shape? --62.46.51.183 (talk) 22:28, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: There may be more than one gene involved, but one that has gotten a lot of attention is EDAR, which codes for Ectodysplasin A receptor, in particular, a variant called 370A, also known as rs3827760, 1540T/C, or Val370Ala. (Ectodysplasin A receptor#Derived EDAR allele) It results in epicanthic fold, thicker hair shafts, more sweat glands (especially on the feet), shovel-shaped incisors, and smaller breasts. It goes back about 35,000 years, with no indication that it was inherited from Altai or other known Neanderthals. Apparently it underwent a recent selective sweep. Zyxwv99 (talk) 03:02, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genetics 

message: The listing of disorders and genetic mutations that may or may not in some or all cases produce morphological features similar to the epicanthic fold is off-topic in this article in my view. If there is a consensus about such a list being needed in the article then I would like to have the reason. There are many more diseases and mutations that come with eyelid creases common among caucasian populations, yet they are not mentioned in this or other related articles. Racist terms such as "Coinslot Eye Disease" are a common slur, fetal alcohol syndrome is also used to refer to Asian people, and that may be partly because of the tolerance of the addition of unrelated disorders in wikipedia articles about normal variations of human morphology. Since the article makes it seem like it, I think it needs to be made clear that the "epicanthic fold" is not the result of a disease. I question the purpose and motivation of edits that deliberately connect it to one.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moot372 (talk • contribs) 18:14, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Medical Conditions" 

message: The question is: what is the percentage amongst individuals without Down syndrome? It is the most popular eyelid, after all.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.220.110.47 (talk) 14:25, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  60% of individuals with Down syndrome 

message: Why did a registered user remove a whole section of information with sources? What is this? You're supposed to back everything up with sources and I have done that. Please don't remove information with sources, you're breaking the basic rules of Wikipedia. I don't know what your problem is. (2001:8003:4E41:F200:D4E4:2CCD:F855:F14D (talk) 13:09, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not create an article on "Epicanthic fold frequency variation in South Asia", that way you can add anything you like. Urselius (talk) 18:35, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Why are you so irritated? The way you are speaking to me is completely unwarranted. I don't know what I did for you to treat me in such a disparaging way. (2001:8003:4E41:F200:D4E4:2CCD:F855:F14D (talk) 01:40, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Your actions speak for themselves. You seem to interpret advice as disparagement - if you have enough material, create a page on the subject, I have many times (here is one of the smaller articles I have created as an example: Gustaf Otto Rosenberg). I have split the section in order to accommodate your additions, now it is at least readable. However, the size of your addition means that South Asia is accorded a third of the coverage of the whole world, it is hardly balanced. Urselius (talk) 11:23, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  You did not give me advice, you told me that my edits can't be taken seriously because I'm not a registered user. That's not advice, you broke the rules of Wikipedia by saying that. (2001:8003:4E41:F200:2856:C0E7:1585:5A7B (talk) 01:12, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Nevertheless, I think the new version of the article is good because everything has been broken down into a more readable format. (2001:8003:4E41:F200:2856:C0E7:1585:5A7B (talk) 01:13, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I advised you to create an account and explained why. Urselius (talk) 07:47, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  , that's what you said. If you think that's advice, then you're mistaken. (2001:8003:4E41:F200:AD0E:C7D:4865:BC36 (talk) 15:21, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Advice, "Create an editor account", the reason why you should, "all edits by IP addresses are treated with some suspicion". I will admit to the omission of 'because', it should have read "because all edits by IP addresses are treated with some suspicion". BTW I'm happy to do this ad infinitum my patience is difficult to test in such situations. Urselius (talk) 17:32, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Let me correct that for you, "Create an editor account if you want your edits to be taken seriously" and it's those words that made you break Wikipedia rules. Telling an IP user to "create an editor account" is not advice as it's not a crime to edit Wikipedia as an IP user. I don't have to create an account if I don't want to. You did not give me advice, you belittled me. You hate IP users, no respectful registered Wikipedia user would say such a thing to an IP user. There's a reason why you were told by another Wikipedia user that your choice of words broke Wikipedia rules. You did not give me advice, you belittled me and your choice of words show me the types of opinions you have on IP users. It really doesn't matter what you think because we all know that at the end of the day, you did the wrong thing. All we need to do to prove that is to look at the edit history of the article. Be my guest and continue to belittle IP users and I'll continue editing articles by respecting the rules of Wikipedia, something that you clearly can't do. (2001:8003:4E41:F200:CC09:7A25:4FB7:84CD (talk) 06:12, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I broke no Wikipedia rules. I reverted your edits for the reasons I have explained before - that they reduced readability and distorted the balance of the text. I am allowed to do that, any editor is; perhaps I should have taken it up on the talk page, that I will admit. Of course if you had had a user account I would have been able to message you directly, but you have a shifting IP address so that was and is not really possible. You are now entering the realms of a patently extremist attitude by accusing me of things that you have no evidence for. I do not hate IP address users, I just treat their edits with more circumspection than I would those of a registered user. If I find an edit that is accurate, useful and cogent made by an IP address user I am quite happy to see it. If it needs tweaking in grammar, citation or linking etc. I will do so without changing its meaning one iota. I have created 36 articles, not one has been deleted or even challenged, one has been rated a 'good article' and another was featured on Wikipedia's main page this year. I have completely rewritten 38 pages, of which 4 have been rated as 'good'. Can you boast of having contributed as much high quality material to Wikipedia? All I care about on Wikipedia is content, content that is cogent and produces balanced, readable articles. I will admit that I have had a lot of unpleasant contact with POV pushers, especially ultra-nationalists, when I see edits that seem to be distorting articles in one direction, for example treating one sub-continent in the same detail as the rest of the world, I do react unfavourably. BTW, this exchange is not what the talk page of an article is meant for, another good reason to create an account, such exchanges should take place on your own talk page. Urselius (talk) 08:36, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

text: Create an editor account - all edits by IP addresses are treated with some suspicion. You are attempting to add far too much material on minority populations in South Asia - of course areas where East Asians and other ethnicities meet and overlap will have higher frequencies of epicanthic folds - that can be taken as being obvious. Urselius (talk) 13:22, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've responded on the your talk page. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 14:56, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: How jolly Urselius (talk) 18:17, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of information with sources

message: I moved a link from "See also" to the text. I don't see any problem in this, but you reverted me with the edit summary "No". Can you please tell me why you reverted that ? --Rsk6400 (talk) 05:52, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to "Mongoloid" 

message: Can apes /monkeys have this? I was googling pics of the Douc monkey, and it seems to have it. - Joaquin89uy (talk) 09:50, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the canthus of the eye is fully visible in the Douc monkey, though they have 'almond-shaped' eyes and something approaching a 'monolid'. I think that the different morphology of features around the eyes, projecting brow-ridges and the lack of a projecting bridge to the nose would preclude epicanthic folds in apes. Urselius (talk) 09:02, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apes 

message: The following content in boldface was added by Whhu22 (WorldCreaterFighter) on 16 March 2022:
Some Northeast Europeans were found to carry a derived gene allele of the EDAR allele, frequently found among East Asian people, which may affect specific facial features.[18]
There is nothing in source [18] (Lamnidis, et al ) that links EDAR to epicanthic folds. Quoting the only mention of EDAR:
Additional content added by WorldCreaterFighter:
Further evidence for a tropical, random or sexual selection as opposed to cold adapted one, is that East Asian-related populations originated in Mainland Southeast Asia rather than Siberia. Paleolithic Siberia was populated by a European- and Native American-related Ancient North Eurasian population, which was subsequently partially-replaced by several northwards migrations of Ancestral East Asians during the late Paleolithic and early Neolithic period.[22][23]
There is nothing in source 22 or 23 about epicanthal folds or EDAR. Links below:
Osada & Kawai 2021 
Yang 2022
http://www.pivotscipub.com/hpgg/2/1/0001
So, this appears to be falsification of the references by an LTA. - Hunan201p (talk) 00:52, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-verifying statements added by long-term abuser  

message: Topic Locked!?! Seriously!?! So the incorrect and outright misleading information can continue to spread ignorance and to be blunt Stupidity!?!
Whoever is in charge of the site needs to consider anyone who would allow clearly or at least easily verifiable false information in a topic and then lock it from being charged and corrected probably never had any business being the new or next person in charge!
Wikipedia isn't a site where broken people can tell themselves "Wikipedia is a place for me to have my own page to spread the results of my mental brokenness and produce more people like me that don't know the truth and facts so I don't get my feelings hurt from realizing I'm abnormal and less than normal!" Sorry, but we just can't afford to let ignorance abound and grow and hold humanity back simply because we don't want to hurt someone's feelings! It's not fair to future generations!
Please fix this and penalize those responsible to prevent and discourage future occurrences.
This is good and right guidance on how to approach this situation just in case it's needed.
Hope this helps! Magnus Rexel (talk) 17:36, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: No it does not. You bloviate at length, but give out no useful information whatsoever. A waste of your time and mine. Urselius (talk) 10:05, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Topic with false and/or incorrect information locked from correction!?!