Talk:Transvestic fetishism

message: Fetishes on cross dressing
 
*Return Petticoating article - Someone redirected the "Petticoating" article to this page. The "Petticoating" article deserves to be included in Wikipedia. Originally, both it and the current "Transvestic fetishism" articles both had their own pages (perfectly fine), but then several vandals (Mdwh and Dr Zak, among others) moved the "Petticoating" article to the "Transvestic fetishism" page and redirected readers from the original "Petticoating" article to this one on "Transvestic fetishism." Both pages should appear among Wikipedia's articles, as they originally did. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gpscholar (talk • contribs) 
The discussion was at Talk:Petticoat Discipline. The upshot, as far as I can see it that there is nothing wrong with an article on petticoating per se. There were however serious problems with your article, it's unreferenced, ill-defined and written in the style of an essay. 
The fact that your article its getting pasted all over Wikipedia doesn't help much either. Dr Zak 01:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: What's the point of this proposal? Most of the information from the other article is missing. Now, it does not belong here anyway, but you know, removing material is a bad, bad, bad idea. -- John Smythe 19:42, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *yawn* I am not yelling, and this article does stick to the facts. I also don't know what you think the status quo of the issue (which issue?) is, so I can't tell you whether I am in favour of it. I also don't quite see where the "sour grapes" are supposed to be; it isn't as if people could possibly gain something from being called either pervertes or thiefs. And if there are no potential gains, then there are no sour grapes, either. Whatever, I guess I won't bother with your rants any more; they are conspicuously lacking any arguments, and you are loosing the VfD anyway. -- John Smythe 13:56, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bad proposal -- too much content missing

message: User:71.231.210.181 has included the text:
::A small number of people with Transvestic Fetishism, as the years pass, want to dress and live permanently as women, and desire surgical or hormonal sex reassignment. In such cases the diagnosis should be changed to Transsexualism.
with an accompanying reference.  Remembering something that happened long ago, I may have overreacted and deleted that text.  Upon questioning, I've restored the text and would like more qualified people to comment. (Everybody is more qualified than I am, should be easy?) Shenme 04:33, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for restoring my edit. 71.231.210.181 05:27, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please review an addition 

message: Transvestic fetishism treatment:
 
The transvestic fetishism treatment consists of not wearing women´s clothing, and stay away from them and from the sight of men who wear them.
Rafaelosornio (talk) 02:20, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I reverted you. Your information is unsourced. We have no way of knowing that you are a researcher in this field. And even if you are, you must adhere to our WP:Reliable sources guideline and our WP:Original research policy. Read that, and also read WP:MEDRS and WP:Conflict of Interest. Flyer22 (talk) 04:46, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible Transvestic fetishism treatment:

message: A discussion about the similarity and differences among several articles including Cross-dressing, Transvestism and other related articles (Drag (clothing), this article, Ball culture, et al.) is taking place at WT:LGBT. Your feedback is welcome. Mathglot (talk) 22:42, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion at [[WT:LGBT]] about similarity among several related articles 

message: transvetic fetishism is a made up disorder  I can't find anything online about it other than it definition I can't find one person that admits to having it can't find anything in social media like facebook such as group page or webpage devoted to it nothing but it definition which is not that well define such as most people that have it or heterosexual men but then says they some times sleep with other men that would make them bisexual I think it made up disorder and should be removed from wikipedia  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.118.111.22 (talk) 18:43, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Straining to give you the benefit of the doubt regarding the seriousness of your question: you "couldn't find anything online" about it?  And your go-to sources are Facebook and social media? Wikipedia does not allow article content that is present only in social media, since they are a self-published source, and not considered reliable for verifying article content. The definition is quite well-defined: it's code F65.1 in ICD-10, and 302.3 in DSM-IV TR.  (In both cases, they are up for review for the next version, but they are clearly defined.) If you want to make general comments about whether the disorder exists or give your personal opinion about it, please don't do it here; you can use the Ref Desk for that.  Mathglot (talk) 22:22, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  transvetic fetishism 

message: Can someone tell me if Glamour (presentation) is a fetish? --14Jenna7Caesura (talk) 23:09, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Glamour (presentation)