Talk:Birth order

message: This article clearly takes the side of birth order having little or no effect on personality. While it is fine to explore that possibility, the page should also list and elaborate on some of the possible generalized qualities of a first-born, middle child, etc. Even a section on stereotypes dealing with birth order would help.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.179.213 (talk) 07:41, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality?

message: What about the double whammy of birth order and being orphaned? Bdelisle 08:19, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth order AND orphaned? 

message: I am a middle child and nothing in this section even remotely applied to me.  Everything here is completely unsubstantiated.
:The original descriptions of birth order are simply what Adler saw as the most common traits of children in that birth position. His focus was more on a child's perceived role in the family. These descriptions have been overemphasized by pop psychology and popular culture. I don't see any theorists who suggest that birth order determines your destiny. Also, if birth order would cause a certain and fixed effect on each child, it wouldn't need to be proven anyway. It would be common sense passed down from the early days of human existence, like the fact that everyone eventually dies. CallidoraBlack (talk) 18:07, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Middle child 

message: I find that this article is full of insults. It's not true, what this article says. An uncyclopedia article on the same topic would give more true information. Who agrees with me?--72.137.26.56 (talk) 17:28, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: See my comment on "Middle Child" above. CallidoraBlack (talk) 18:07, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Could you be a little more specific about your objections? --Jcbutler (talk) 20:09, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Insults

message: The personality section seems to be entirely filled with criticism, and I am inclined to rename that section accordingly. Any thoughts? CallidoraBlack (talk) 18:07, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Personality section

message: I believe information about middle children are underrepresented. I mean, Middle Child Syndrome is a serious problem in terms of middle children's personalities, so the article should at least mention something similar.
: as middle child syndrome redirects here, yes, the article should say something about it k kisses 13:30, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Middle Child Syndrome? 

message: I am just wondering what mechanism the researcher proposes for an "evolved, biological" role in birth order and homosexuality. Certainly this cannot be strictly genetic, according to a correct understanding of evolution. If the effect occurs via a (even covert) cultural adaptation it shouldn't be that hard to uncover. The argument is basically preposterous and should be balanced, if it is to be maintained on this page, by a reasonable opposing viewpoint. Otherwise stick to the statistics and spare the reader the babble.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.21.109.42 (talk) 21:23, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Homosexuality & Evolution 

message: I really don't see the relevance of this list, not even from the information given under the section. Ornilnas (talk) 10:16, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Neither do I. Lova Falk talk 10:50, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of well-known fourthborns 

message: I think the claim that 'for every older brother a male has, his odds of being gay go up 33%' is dubious at best. That means that male with 3 or more older brothers has a 100% chance of being gay. SO, if you have three or more older brothers, you are gay, make no mistake. I just don't buy that (and I'll have to tell my friend that at least three of his younger brothers are gay...he's the oldest of 6 boys). To me, it sounds like something someone made up.
To all the people upset because the article seems to be maligning them, the idea isn't that being youngest, oldest, middle, etc, means that you will be a certain way, it just means that statistically, a large percentage of people conform to that truth. If 75% of older children act a certain way, that still leaves 25% that don't meet the description. It's large enough percentage to make it a rule, but that remaining 25% still leaves a lot of people...just because you aren't the way older children are described in the article, doesn't mean that the whole theory is bunk (which it may be, of course). AnnaGoFast (talk) 00:53, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Older brothers and homosexuality. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Birth order. 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/20120817233154/http://birthorderpersonality.com:80/ to http://birthorderpersonality.com
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071120090528/http://news.independent.co.uk:80/sci_tech/article3172307.ece to http://news.independent.co.uk/sci_tech/article3172307.ece
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:11, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I've seen studies that claim the of gender among siblings has effects too, such female then female then male birth sequence, or male then female, etc.
If sources could be found I think this would be good to include.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 214.3.138.230 (talk) 18:34, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gender sequence