Content deleted Content added
Line 636: :::: But half that article, as it stands, ''is'' about Blanchard's theories. And I'm sorry, but Wikipedia in no way supports arbitrarily lumping independent theories together and calling it a single theory. For something like the fifth time in this section, ''there is no scientific feminine essence theory of transsexuality''. It's an article on a fake theory. Rather, there are a number of ''real'' theories which Blanchard lumps together. Blanchard does not get to dictate how Wikipedia should lay out its articles. :::: As for a separate article for each theory, first off, "feminine essence" would need to be deleted, since ''it's not a [[Scientific theory|theory]]''. It's a philosophical concept at best; science doesn't deal in "essences". Secondly, having a bunch of small articles scattered around is in no way conducive to learning about a topic. What good do you think having a short article out there called "Ramachandran's 'phantom limb' theory of transsexualism", and a dozen others like it, will do for anyone? If someone wants to learn about the theories of transsexualism, then ''there should be an article on theories of transsexualism''. Any theory which has enough content to justify a whole article, like Blanchard's theories, should get one, and have only a summary in the article. -- [[Special:Contributions/70.57.222.103|70.57.222.103]] ([[User talk:70.57.222.103|talk]]) 05:48, 26 September 2010 (UTC) : After reviewing other articles, I change my vote to simply '''delete''' it (or, rather, leave it as a redirect). There's already [[Etiology of transsexualism]]. It needs a ton of improvement, but that can be worked on. With that article present, there is absolutely no need for an article on a fake theory of transsexualism created as a foil to lump all non-Blanchardian theories together. And there's nothing in the [[Feminine essence concept of transsexuality]] that I see that's worth merging into : Proposal: | |||