Talk:Vaginismus/Archive 1

message: I reverted this edit because it had POV language in it (such as "Anyone trying to make money or offering unique fast solutions to this problem should be sued".) However, much of the edit seemed to be well intentioned, so if the anon who added it would like to discuss changes we could make to the edit, I'd like to welcome you here, and let you know that your contributions are welcome as long as they can conform to Wikipedia standards, and I invite you to join in the discussion here. (I'm leaving the message here instead of on the talk page, because the change is from an anon with one edit.) --Arcadian 15:41, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent edit

message: I think we don't need this link per arguments above.  There is a dmoz entry for Vaginismus so I would suggest adding  and  to the external links sections.  I would also recommend adding more inline citations to the article to conform to a higher standard of quality.TheRingess (talk) 00:18, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Added the templates.  Agree that more citations are needed, so added moresources template.Joie de Vivre 00:27, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  3rd Opinion 

message: Hi,
Can we add the following link: http://www.vaginismus-awareness-network.org/?
This is a non profit website which offers information to women, their partners and gynecologists. It is all free and there is nothing at all commercial about the site.
Thanks
:Yeah, I've looked it over now, and I don't see why not.  That other link was commercial, this one adds lots of useful information that the article does not have.  OK.  Joie de Vivre 22:59, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: External link

message: there is an inordinate percentage of this article devoted to masturbation, which many would argue has nothing to do with vaginismus, yet for some reason has its own paragraph and heading. this compromises the objective, purely informative purpose of the article - no printed encyclopedia would devote so much attention in an article on vaginismus to masturbation.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.215.104.180 (talk) 05:28, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I just checked the 13 Jan 2008 version of the article and I disagree that there is an "inordinate percentage" at that time, and there's even less now.  The section does, however, read a bit too much like a "How to" rather than an encyclopedic entry on potential treatment/avoidance.  It needs to be rewritten and sourced, but if the length stays the same, or even grows a little, I certainly see no problem. - 142.167.65.139 (talk) 04:34, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Masturbation

message: I don't know the tag for a section that doesn't cite sources, so I can't tag it, though. nhinchey (talk) 12:12, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Experience of vaginismus doesn't cite any sources

message: This article does not talk about how it affects women with the condition during childbirth, if it does at all.  This seems like a topical issue for the article.  (If it's obvious that it isn't an issue, and I'm just ignorant of the physiology, I'm assuming that others would also make the same mistake.) - 142.167.65.139 (talk) 04:34, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Childbirth

message: Medical dilators may be obtained online, or tapered vegetables can be used at home instead, with the same effect.? Really? I'm a little uncertain as to whether this is serious or not... Spock of Vulcan (talk) 19:38, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vegetables? 

message: The Emotional Response section uses informal language and filler words.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.27.78.190 (talk) 07:43, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I worked on that some during my comprehensive edit of the article today. It's still unsourced and hugely subjective, but I didn't want to just delete it all. For now, it can serve as a placeholder until — ideally — someone can find, paraphrase and properly cite a reputable source documenting sufferers' actual experiences. IMO leaving that paragraph or two there in the meantime is preferable to having nothing there at all. —GrammarFascist (talk) 05:22, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Emotional Response 

message: I don't have access to the journal article referenced for this section, and the wording of the procedure description that had been in the article sounded... odd. I can see why sedation or general anesthesia might be necessary in order for a vaginismus sufferer to be able to receive intra-vaginal or even peri-vaginal injection. But the idea that a dilator — much less a "large" one! — would routinely be inserted into a patient drugged unconscious when the point of using a paralytic agent such as Botox would be to prevent the reflex from occurring with patient-controlled penetration seems, frankly, more like something to be found in pornographic fiction than in a procedure likely to meet the relevant standard of care. It would be fantastic if actual reconstructive surgeons, or even others with access to the article, could check up on what's actually in the cited article, and correct the section of the article here as appropriate... —GrammarFascist (talk) 05:22, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Botox treatment (Are you kidding me?!) 

message: What does this mean? "Alternative treatment requires only patient intervention using a discreet 'Vaginal Acceptance Trainer'."
There are no citations.  When I google "Vaginal Acceptance Trainer" I get a commercial website for a trademarked "Vaginal Acceptance Trainer" here: http://www.vagi-wave.co.uk/.
I personally suffer from this condition and I am leery of commercial products without seeing some medical backing.  Also the device is £59 for a plastic wand, so they're clearly for-profit.
I feel the same way about vaginismus.com.  You can buy dilators for much less, around $12 is what I typically pay.  It saddens me that in the void of good medical advice, these profiteers appear.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Fejoa rock (talk • contribs) 18:28, 27 January 2013
:You are correct that there was nothing on this. It just sounds like another type of dilator. I deleted it and stated that a secondary source citation was needed that it actually didn't stretch the tissue.Simoni217 (talk) 14:33, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Treatment 

message: Hello all,
As part of a class assignment, I researched and wrote a paper on this subject, and then had to edit the article according to my research. Below I summarized my changes, and they address a number of concerns expressed above. My major issue was that I could not get multiple citations of the same website to show up as one reference, and I apologize for that. Otherwise, please read, review, and reply! Thank you!
Changes Summary
* Added second to last paragraph under Primary vaginismus because Lamont Classification is for use in GYN exams, and not necessarily applicable at home. 
* Made minor grammatical edit to beginning of last paragraph
* Added list under Secondary Vaginismus
* Added last paragraph under Prevalence
* Added Cycle of Pain under Treatment (could not upload graphic because of copywrite) 
* Moved last paragraph of Treatment to second to last paragraph of Physical because it made more sense there categorically
* Added last paragraph of Psychological because the article did not mention Sensate Focusing at all
* Added last paragraph to Physical
* Added middle paragraph to Neuromodulators because women should be warned of the risks of surgical so-called solutions to sexual dysfunctions
* Added references to General (i.e. emotional experience)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lufia16 (talk • contribs) 19:15, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broad Additions Made 

message: I see that you have no External links section in this article. Is that by design? If so, why? If not, I suggest the following Sharecare page, "Q. What are vaginal panic attacks?" Sharecare has many articles and videos on health-related topics that are presented in an easily understood way. Dr. Mehmet Oz is the presenter in this video as it's a segment from his show. I see nowhere on the page or site where they are selling anything. This segment on vaginismus is not an in-depth article with a lot of new technical information, but the video is very valuable for people who have difficulty visualizing the material. 
The condition is briefly described as are some of the causes, a fly-through "Visible Woman" model type illustration of the pelvic organs is quickly shown, then the use of biofeedback in treating the condition is described and demonstrated on a fully clothed woman utilizing her forearm muscles. The video diffuses both the audience's nervous tittering and, I imagine, reduces stress in fearful sufferers who are seeking information. http://www.sharecare.com/health/gynecology/what-are-vaginal-panic-attacks  Thank you, Wordreader (talk) 19:43, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested external link. 

message: Wow, the Causes section of this article has surprisingly few footnotes. Did anyone research this, or was it just guesswork?
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Oulipal (talk • contribs) 17:56, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Causes 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Vaginismus. 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/20131020055743/http://sogc.org/publications/when-sex-hurts-vaginismus/ to http://sogc.org/publications/when-sex-hurts-vaginismus/
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) 07:49, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified