Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:27, 8 April 2013

	Female genital mutilation is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones Date Process Result September 19, 2011 Featured article candidate Not promoted

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Human rights Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Sexology and sexuality Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Medicine Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Gender studies This article is part of WikiProject Gender studies. This WikiProject aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Gender studiesWikipedia:WikiProject Gender studiesTemplate:WikiProject Gender studiesGender studies ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. To-do list: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Assess : see Unassessed Gender studies articles and Unknown-importance Gender studies articles Cleanup : edit to see Collaborate : see /Collaboration Copyedit : edit to see Deletion sorting : see /Sexuality and gender Expand : edit to see Infobox : see Gender studies articles needing infoboxes Merge : edit to see Notability : edit to see NPOV : edit to see Orphans : Brannon Masculinity Scale · Holy Virility · Media and gender · Michael Kaufman (author) · Women's education in Saudi Arabia Photo : see Misplaced Pages requested photographs of gender studies Split : History of feminism Stubs : see Gender studies stubs Translate : see /translation Update : edit to see Verify : Riot grrrl Needs attention : see Gender studies articles needing attention Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Feminism Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Women's History Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Anthropology Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Template:WAP assignment

Why is this called female genital mutilation and not female circumcision.

This process is done on cultural or religious grounds by certain groups living in Africa, there is no reason to slander this as 'female genital mutilation'. And if you are going to call this 'female genital mutilation' why is the article on male circumcision not called 'male genital mutilation'? We need to end this bigoted double standard. YvelinesFrance (talk) 22:12, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

You are correct the article on male circumcision should be called male genital mutilation.Theroadislong (talk) 22:15, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

We as Wikipedians do not unilaterally decide which term is used. We simply use the term used by the best quality literature on the topic at hand, thus the names of the two pages in question.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 22:19, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

"Best quality literature' is subjective. I don't put much value in the work of gender theorists, sociologists or feminists. In any case I will attempt to change the article title for male circumcision to 'male genital mutilation'. YvelinesFrance (talk) 23:16, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

I am sure that will go over equally well. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 23:33, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

You might want to review the talk page history. This has been discussed and decided on a number of time. I suspect that most would find FGM much more traumatic than male circumcision. Jim1138 (talk) 00:05, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

your suspicion about trauma is not NPOV. The "best quality literature" is also not NPOV. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.218.249.191 (talk • contribs)

"We need to end this bigoted double standard." "I don't put much value in the work of gender theorists, sociologists, or feminists." Thanks for that laugh. Have you considered a career in comedy? 68.100.138.56 (talk) 03:08, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

As usual, the rule here is that problems in the real world must be solved in the real world first, not on Misplaced Pages. There is sexual discrimination in the real world when it comes to genital mutilation. There are strong reasons for this, and it will take some time for attitudes on female and male genital mutilation to become synchronised. In decreasing order of importance:

• The most common, 'typical' forms of female genital mutilation which dominate the debate are much, much worse than (male) circumcision.
• Male circumcision is much more common than female genital mutilation, especially in the influential industrialised countries. It is always easier to combat human rights violations that are only committed by marginalised minorities or abroad.
• Girls are typically perceived as pure, weak, passive and worthy of protection, whereas boys are perceived as tough, active and robust. I believe the resulting bias can also be observed in the treatment of male victims of (non-surgical) sexual violence, which can be even worse than that of female victims and doesn't seem to make much progress anywhere. Hans Adler 10:22, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Surely FGM is a loaded term and suggests that wikipedia takes a normative position in relation to practices of bodily modification. If wikipedia wants to remain as neutral as possible, it should reject the framing of the discourse in the value-laden terms of 'mutilation', and describe the practice ethnographically, empirically, and as objectively as possible. The term FGM is EXPLICITLY linked to a political agenda, and by using the language of this discourse, wikipedia lends its legitimacy to a particularly ideological orientation in direct contravention of its own standards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.93.190.89 (talk • contribs)

• Misplaced Pages actually has a naming policy about exactly this situation, please see WP:POVTITLE. I can see valid arguments supporting either title. This suggestion to change article's title comes up regularly, but there has never been consensus to do so, please see: Talk:Female_genital_mutilation/Archive_8#Requested_move, Talk:Female_genital_mutilation/Archive_8#Requested_move_2, Talk:Female_genital_mutilation/Archive_6#Terminology and others. Zad68 16:20, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Contribution to the Africa portion

Hello everyone, my name is Natasha and I am a student at Rice University hoping to add some parts to the already existing page on Female Genital Mutilation. I noticed as I was looking through the page that there is a section on FGM in Africa, but I don't think it's fair to categorize all of Africa into one small section in this page, especially since the prevalence of FGM is so different across different countries within Africa. Thus, I plan to make some additions to the page by focusing on why FGM is more prevalent in certain parts of Africa over other parts. I still am not sure which parts I will focus in on, but I am definitely open to whatever suggestions any of you may have for this idea, or even if any have advice on how to make this most effective. At first I though to make a separate page and break down FGM more specifically in parts of Africa, but I am afraid that doing so will simply cause me to be redundant in terms of the information on FGM and its implications. If you have any suggestions, feel free to let me know. Thank you!

Natashacruz12 (talk) 22:40, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. It's wonderful to have someone actually interested in developing content for this article. My only suggestion is to be sure to identify high-quality sources for the information, reflect the sources accurately in your content, and be sure that you cover the topics in due weight. I have this article on my watchlist and might comment here and there. Cheers... Zad68 03:53, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello again! So I have been working on my edits, and what I have decided would be best for the article, is to break down the "Prevalence and attempts to end the practice" section into several parts. What I will do is, instead of having "Practicing Countries" as a subheading, I will simply eliminate that and use most of the first paragraph as the introduction to the section itself, and from there I will create an "Africa" subheading, and I will put a "Non-African countries" subheading so that Shannon can include her parts also, unless she has something else in mind. From there, I will include different sections of the prevalence of FGM in Africa under the allotted section and hopefully can include more in-depth detail to this topic. If you have any suggestions, let me know! I will be putting up the edits pretty soon! Thanks!! Natashacruz12 (talk) 16:38, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I wasn't going to state anything because, though I've been involved with other controversial topics on Misplaced Pages, I generally stay away from this article because of its controversial nature (especially its heated talk page discussions, which are usually about the title of the article), and because I have enough controversial matters and stress on Misplaced Pages to worry about, and because I figured that some of what I am about to state would be handled by other experienced editors watching this article. My advice is this: Though Zad68 has addressed it a bit by mentioning WP:DUE WEIGHT, I point out that Misplaced Pages practices WP:SUMMARY STYLE. We shouldn't have a section in this article on every part of the world that practices FGM, especially when there is a Prevalence of female genital mutilation by country article that exists for that. We are supposed to summarize in this article what should be covered in depth in that article; we then point readers to that article with a "Main article" link, as was done for the Practicing countries section. Having some sections in this article about countries that practice FGM is fine, but we should not go overboard on it. We also shouldn't have two sections about the same thing. The Female Genital Mutilation around the world section that Shannon7mcnamara added is basically an extended version of the Prevalence and attempts to end the practice section, especially its Practicing countries subsection that already exists. You plan to eliminate the Practicing countries heading and any redundancy it may have, so that's a step in the right direction. The other sections about the prevalence of FGM and ending the practice of it should also, of course, be taken care of just as appropriately.

The only other advice I have to give you at this time is the following: Per Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style#Capital letters, you need to make sure that headings are not inappropriately capitalized. For the "Female Genital Mutilation around the world" heading, if that were a heading we should use, the "Female Genital Mutilation" part should be in lowercase (whether spelled out or abbreviated). But the reason that it is not a title that we should use is because, per Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style#Section headings, "Headings should not refer redundantly to the subject of the article, or to higher-level headings, unless doing so is shorter or clearer. (Early life is preferable to His early life when his refers to the subject of the article; headings can be assumed to be about the subject unless otherwise indicated.)" Also use WP:REFPUNCT (punctuation before, not after, references) and avoid WP:WHITE SPACES (one or more extra white gaps between a section). Shannon7mcnamara's aforementioned edit shows that she is not aware of WP:REFPUNCT, and it comes with WP:WHITE SPACES. And, finally, in addition to what Zad68 stated about being sure to use high-quality sources for information about FGM, you should generally use the most up-to-date medical sources when adding information about a medical topic; this is per WP:MEDRS. There are exceptions, however; when covering some historical/social aspects of FGM, adhering to WP:MEDRS is not necessary. I wouldn't state that medical sources are needed for every aspect of the prevalence of FGM, since the information is more about prevalence than it is about relaying information about the details of the procedures. There are up-to-date anatomy books that accurately document the prevalence of FGM, for example. Anyway, that's my advice for now. Flyer22 (talk) 20:02, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello Natasha, I thought your edits did a good amount to improve the article. I fixed a typo I saw, but otherwise I didn't catch any major formatting errors. The editor above me seems to have a much more solid grasp on formatting and appropriate Misplaced Pages standards than I do. If you're looking for a few more ways to expand this section on Africa before the project due date, I think you could include some more concrete numerical data about the spread of FGM. The subsection on Europe has a few exact statistics that I thought were compelling, however I realize this may be hard to find for Africa given the sources that you have already used. I think you should also watch out for redundancy with the "Prevalence and attempts to end the practice" section. This section includes information about Africa and policy change that could probably be merged with the "Africa" subsection. Good luck with your final edits! CoeA (talk) 02:41, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your suggestions! I have already done a lot of the things that you mentioned, but I will definitely be working on finding better statistics to incorporate into the article. In terms of running into problems with having similar information, I made sure to incorporate some of it into my section already, but I will continue to expand on it!

Hi Natasha, just a few points after a brief glance. Quite a bit of the material you added is already in the article, so if you could check that first, that would go a long way to making sure your material sticks. Also, some formatting issues: most punctuation (periods, commas, colons, semi-colons) comes before footnotes, and if you could respect the citation formats already used in the article that would also be appreciated. SlimVirgin 03:39, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Natasha. I think the other people who have commented on the talk page have already given a lot of good advice, so I will try not to be redundant. I looked mainly at the section of the article on Africa since you said that was the area you worked on. This section was very comprehensive and seems balanced. I looked at the sources used for this section and they all appear to be reliable sources. I also think the section has a relatively neutral point of view, with a few exceptions. In a few places, the diction makes the entry sound more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Phrases like "in fact," "seems to," and "quite a bit" should be removed. When you say, "Some believe that exposing children to the clitoris directly can be harmful to them during childbirth," the statement is too general--some of who or what believe?

There were two places that I thought you could use citations. Both were statements about the cultural diversity and complexity of a region. The first was "West Africa is one of the most culturally diverse and complex regions in Africa, making it difficult to come up with a broad summation of the prevalence of FGM," and the second was "One of the greatest concerns of these anti-FGM advocates is the issue of how to implement these laws once they are in place. Because FGM is such a culturally tied practice, it has been difficult to provide changes that didn’t directly threaten a region’s cultural identity." Lastly, there are a couple of places where the wording could be more clear, including "is less than what is seen in the world" and "Burkina Faso is a rare country, in that since 1996, the practice of FGM is severely sanctioned." I hope this is helpful! Let me know if you have any questions, either here or on my talk page. Weatherby551 (talk) 16:14, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your input. I already did a lot of the edits and will continue to do so. In the areas where you suggested that I incorporate citations, I made sure to do so. I have changed my wording to make it more neutral and less as if I were inferring. Your contribution really helped and hopefully as I continue to add more, you will continue to help along the process.

Thank you all so much for the input along the process of editing this page. I have been considering all of your suggestions and I plan to continue to work towards making this page the greatest it can be. I have already implemented some of the changes, such as fixing some of the issues in wording and adding citations where they need to be. To incorporate the work that was already there, I moved parts of the already present sections into the Africa portion. More specifically, I added an East Africa section where I placed the section titled "colonial opposition" since it was all about Kenya. I will continue to work on the other regions in Africa as time allows. Also, I changed the arrangement of the section "prevalence and attempts to end the practice" to have a better flow. In terms of having information that is already present in the article, I felt it was necessary to bring it into context in Africa, so I tried to make it a bit more specific to these specific regions, because not all parts of Africa practice FGM for the same reason. I will continue to improve the information so that it may be more indicative of what I'm trying to do with the page. I will continue adding pictures and more information as I continue to work on this page. Again, thank you all for the input and I can't wait to continue working on this to keep improving the page more and more. Natashacruz12 (talk) 17:43, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Natasha, could you say which course this is part of? Shannon posted two templates to the talk page, but the article isn't listed in the first course, and the second course link is red. SlimVirgin 17:50, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Contribution to FGM

Hi everyone, I'm Shannon McNamara, and a Rice University student like Natasha. I am planning on adding to this FGM page by creating sections that focus on the varieties of different places that FGM is practiced. It is a common misconception that FGM only occurs in Africa, and I want to add some sections about the practice in places like India, Asia, the Middle East, and even the United States. I also want to talk about how the practice itself and the customs around FGM vary from country to country. If you have any suggestions for my additional sections, please feel free to reach out to me. I welcome any recommendations! Thank you! Shannon7mcnamara (talk) 22:39, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Shannon7mcnamara. I didn't know that it was a common misconception that FGM only occurs in Africa, but, thankfully, Misplaced Pages has not helped to spread that misconception. In the #Contribution to the Africa portion section above, I've given some advice about your and Natashacruz12's additions/planned additions. Flyer22 (talk) 20:02, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

minor edit

Minor typo in "By Region" section, United States, 3rd paragraph, line 4: should read "charged" not changed." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lizbizeh (talk • contribs) 01:20, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Done. Thanks Jim1138 (talk) 06:40, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Article Paraphrased to Mislead

The following is highly problematic: 'according to official statements of the top Muslim clerical body of the largest Muslim-majority nation of the world, the Indonesian Ulema Council, “the practice (of FGM) is a religious obligation that should be done to control women’s sexual desires”.' (emphasis added)

1. There is no "official statement" in the article cited for support.*
2. Two individuals made statements claiming it is a religious obligation.
3. There is no quotation in the article cited for support.

The excerpt in question is deliberately misleading and should be removed.

• http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2013/02/14/bad-start-year-women-indonesia.html  Mr JM  17:17, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Incomplete citations

Hi, some recent edits have added incomplete citation details so that the text is hard to check. For example, "LandInfo (12). "Female genital mutilation of women in West Africa". LandInfo." That needs a date and page numbers, and a link if it's online, which it is. And Plan (2005). Tradition and Rights: female genital cutting in West Africa needs author's full name, publisher and page numbers.

Also, rather than "ref name=p", it would be more helpful if you could use the author's name, and even year and page number; for example, "ref name=Smith2013p1" allows other editors to see exactly what is being referenced. SlimVirgin 05:19, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Just another point about sources. The article should for the most part rely on academic and medical secondary sources (books or papers, but not individual studies, per WP:MEDRS), bodies such as the WHO, and high-quality news sources. It should ideally avoid tertiary websites (such as this) that simply repeat material from these other sources. The reason for this is that there's no point in Misplaced Pages using a site that says "according to the WHO," when we can use the WHO ourselves. SlimVirgin 00:43, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

By Region Comments

Hello Natasha,

First off this article would receive a 10 in comprehensiveness. You responded to a need on the page and did so in great fashion. Some of the information is a bit redundant so you may just wan to reword or take out some things. The Souring is a 6, everything is well cited. You may want to add some blue links with the double brackets so you can link your information or certain words to another page.Neutrality was a 3, as you represented all sides to the issue. Readability was also a three. The subsections were divided properly creating a smooth flow to the article. Thus leads to a 2 in formatting , besides a few small punctuation footnote errors. Illustrations I would give a 1. I did see one image in your section, but I think you would be able to add 1 more if possible. But this is great ! Asiamcclearygaddy (talk) 15:59, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much for this Asia! I plan to add more pictures to the site as soon as I find appropriate ones. Also, I will continue to expand on the article and add blue links in areas where it is appropriate to do so. Your review really helps and I thank you for doing this to help this page. I will continue to add more to the page as I find more information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Natashacruz12 (talk • contribs) 17:56, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

I've made the United States section invisible for now, as it seems to contradict material in the rest of the article, and uses a source from the 1990s to say that FGM is not illegal there as of 2013. SlimVirgin 03:19, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

By region peer review

Hey Shannon,

First off, you did a great job on on this section! It was really informative and provided a comprehensive overview of FGM around the world. However, one aspect that I thought could use improvement is your use of linking to other articles - I didn't notice many blue links in the "By region" section, and linking to other pages could help understandability of the information. Also, I noticed in the Australia and Europe subsection there was information in need of citations. The Middle East section was particularly interesting, and given the fact that there's such diversity in practices and prevalence, I think that section could benefit from an expansion - perhaps by including a more refined description about the cultural influences and practices that result in such diversity? Additionally, I would have loved to have read the United States section (though I know it's been hidden) so I think you should definitely try to find a more recent source to update the information with as I think the inclusion of the US would help round out this section. Lastly, I noticed a few minor grammatical errors in this section that I edited.

I hope my comments have been helpful! Overall though, great job! If I was confusing or you would like to discuss what I said further please let me know - I would be more than happy to discuss with you. Good luck! Daniellam91 (talk) 01:29, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Peer Review 2

I think you did a really great job giving a comprehensive view of the issue on a global level, because I did not realize it was such a widespread issue. I have a few suggestions:

• The sections on Australia, Asia, and Europe could use additional and more diverse citations, because I worry that some people could argue that your source could be biased, so more diverse citations would squelch that.

• It could be cool to have an infographic or some sort of visual aid that shows the global regions that are affected by the practice of FGM.

• I think it might be unnecessary to have an Africa section with a West Africa subsection under that since you do not discuss any specific African region other than West Africa.

• Perhaps add a few more links under "See Also"

Very well written and neutral, I only saw minor issues that could be easily remedied.

ChloeCBlaskiewicz (talk) 15:32, 8 April 2013 (UTC)ChloeCBlaskiewicz

Recent edits

Templates and Rushwan

Middayexpress, could I ask you again not to add material based on tertiary websites? Also, per WP:CITE, references need to be internally consistent, and templates shouldn't be added over objections. I've left the templates in the section the students added, because that section can't remain in the article as it is, so there's no point in converting the references.

And it is not only according to the WHO that FGM is rooted in gender inequality. SlimVirgin 00:22, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Could you add a page number for this, and let us know what the source (Rushwan, Hamid. Female Circumcision in the Sudan. University of Khartoum Faculty of Medicine, 1983) says?

The practice in Africa and the Arabian Peninsula is believed to have its origins in ancient cultural ceremonies performed by Afro-Asiatic (Hamito-Semitic) communities inhabiting the Red Sea area. Cultural transmission and migrations from this core region subsequently introduced the custom to other populations, from where it again dispersed.

I can see a bit of it on snippet view, but it seems to attribute this to one named source only, at least in the bit of the text that I can see. If that's right, we should simply use the source Rushwan uses, and attribute it. To say "it is believed" makes it sound as though it's the consensus view. SlimVirgin 00:26, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Citation templates

Middayexpress, could I ask you to stop adding templates to the citations that are already properly formatted? The templates slow down load time, and the way the refs are being added here (half manual, half templates) is leading to inconsistent formatting; in addition the template parameters are being filled in inconsistently, so that, for example, they sometimes say first name, last name, and sometimes last name, first name. See WP:CT: "Because templates can be contentious, editors should not add citation templates, or change an article with a consistent citation format to another, without gaining consensus."

I would like to bring the article to GAN or FAC at some point, so it has to use the same format throughout. If it's easier for you to add refs with templates, that's fine, but please allow me to make them consistent once you've made the edit.

Also, there's no need to add caps to female genital cutting and female genital circumcision in the first sentence. See Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style/Capital letters. The only reason female genital mutilation starts with a capital is that it's the beginning of the sentence.

Some of your other edits are problematic too (e.g. adding "according to the WHO" to the sentence that says FGM is rooted in gender inequality, when there are multiple sources saying this). Are you willing to discuss them, rather than continuing to restore? SlimVirgin 16:03, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

The citations were already properly formatted per the "cite" template at the top of the screen, but were changed for some odd reason into some idiosyncratic format not consistent with the template or the manual of style. The cite template is there to be used for that purpose. Kindly also stop removing FGM/FGC/FC's reputed place of origin from the lede. Moreover, please bear in mind that reasons for the practice obviously vary from community to community (c.f. the AWOIV , an NGO). Per WP:YESPOV, the WHO's debatable assertion that "the practice is rooted in gender inequality and ideas about the need to control women and their sexuality" therefore cannot be cited in Misplaced Pages's voice as though this were true for every community when it's only the situation in some communities; neither can the organization's claim that the procedure "is practiced mainly in 28 countries in western, eastern, and north-eastern Africa, and in parts of Asia and the Middle East". In reality, the custom is heavily concentrated in Northeast Africa, where it originated and from where it spread to other parts of the continent and elsewhere, either directly or indirectly through intermediaries. Middayexpress (talk) 18:10, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

(ec) Another wholesale revert. Please explain what you're trying to do. It is not only "according to the WHO," that it's in 28 countries in Africa; there are two sources in the footnote and several more not cited. It is not only "according to the WHO" that it's rooted in gender inequality; see the footnote. This isn't a million miles from "according to the WHO, Paris is the capital of France." When someone objects to edits and starts a discussion about them, the usual practice is to discuss, not to ignore them and continue reverting. SlimVirgin 18:23, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

The article is referenced without citation templates; per WP:CITEVAR these should not be added to manual references, so please allow me to fix them.

As for the rest, are you reading the sources? For example, as well as the WHO, Anika Rahman and Nahid Toubia in Female Genital Mutilation: A Guide to Laws and Policies Worldwide, Zed Books, 2000, p. 7, also say it is practised in 28 countries in Africa. They are experts in this area. Are you saying they are wrong about the figure (and if so, do you have an equally good source), or is it just that you want the sub-Saharan and Northeastern regions to be stressed (if the latter, could you not just add that to the sentence)? SlimVirgin 18:32, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

You've done infinitely more reverts than me, so let's not get picky here. WHO's claim that the practice is "rooted in gender inequality and ideas about the need to control women and their sexuality" is obviously contentious, especially since practitioners of female circumcision do not see it that way. Per WP:NOTADVOCATE, it is not our place to choose sides here (which includes the WHO's, btw), but instead to present the issue as neutrally as possible. WP:YESPOV is likewise clear that users should "avoid stating seriously contested assertions as facts if different reliable sources make conflicting assertions about a matter, treat these assertions as opinions rather than facts, and do not present them as direct statements." That applies here as well. Middayexpress (talk) 18:34, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

As I wrote, the practice's distribution in Africa is heavily concentrated in Northeast Africa, not in Sub-Saharan Africa as a whole. In Sub-Saharan Africa, it is mainly practiced by communities who have adopted it either directly from the Afro-Asiatic communities in Northeast Africa, or, more typically, indirectly via intermediary groups, who themselves acquired it from said Northeast African communities. For example, while the Kikuyu Bantus practice female circumcision, they borrowed the practice from neighboring Nilotic populations, who in turn had already adopted the practice from neighbouring Afro-Asiatic groups (typically along with other customs, such as the use of age sets). Other Bantus, though, adopted the custom directly from Afro-Asiatic populations. Bantu, Nilotic and West African groups who have not experienced that direct or indirect Afro-Asiatic contact typically do not practice the custom. Regarding the citation formatting, the template at the top of the editing screen is there for the purpose. It should therefore be used whenever absent rather than relying on idiosyncratic manual formatting. Middayexpress (talk) 18:46, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

We don't write this article from the point of view of FGM practitioners, but from the point of view of reliable sources. There's nothing contentious from the point of view of the sources about saying this is rooted in gender inequality and attempts to control sexuality. They all say that in one form or another. You might consider reading our neutrality policy, particularly the section, WP:UNDUE. That explains what we mean by neutrality on Misplaced Pages, namely that our articles reflect the views of reliable sources, in rough proportion to the way those views are reflected in the source material.

And I haven't been reverting you wholesale. I've done my best with each of your edits to keep what could be kept, and to ask you here on talk about the rest.

As for templates, we have a very well-established and accepted practice of not adding templates over objections. As I said, if it's easier for you to add references using the toolbar, that's fine – I don't mind how you initially write them – but please allow other editors to fix them so that they are consistent. Even on your own terms you are sometimes adding first name/last name, and at other times last name/first name, then you revert when it's fixed. SlimVirgin 19:15, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Actually, per the npov policy, "neutral point of view (NPOV) means representing fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources." That includes the views of actual FGM practioners (which are virtually absent from this page), not just opponents of the practice like the WHO. WP:NOTADVOCATE is likewise clear that "content hosted in Misplaced Pages is not for advocacy, propaganda, or recruitment of any kind". Editors are obviously allowed to have personal opinions on the issue; they just can't let those opinions get in the way of presenting the issue as neutrally as possible. Regarding the formatting, there was no consistency to the adjustments in the first place, which is part of the problem. Per WP:CITE, Misplaced Pages does not have a "house style" anyway; all that is required is consistency in formatting. That said, I propose use of the standard citation template for a cleaner, consistent, complete, and more easily reproduceable citation format. Middayexpress (talk) 19:44, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Plagiarism

Several paragraphs in the new "by region" section contain material copied word for word from the sources without in-text attribution. Examples below, but I only checked some of it so there may be more. Some is still in the article, some has been edited by others (myself included) and is now slightly different, and I made one section invisible for other reasons before I realized it had been copied. Most of the new section was added on March 18; this was it on 6 April before the copy edit.

Bishop 1997

• Misplaced Pages, citing Bishop 1997 for the first sentence:

• Female genital mutilation is practiced in some aspect in almost all African countries, but it is also being performed in parts of Asia, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Persian Gulf, Pakistan, Russia, South America (Peru, Brazil, and Eastern Mexico), and Australia (from Urabunna in the South to the Eastern Shores of the Gulf of Carpentaria) . The World Health Organization estimates that 80 million girls and women in more than 30 countries of Africa, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia are circumcised. The practice spans socioeconomic, ethnic, and cultural groups including Christians, Muslims, and followers of indigenous African religions.

• Bishop 1997, p. 233:

• Although it is practiced in some aspect in almost all African countries, it also is being performed in parts of Asia, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Persian Gulf, Pakistan, Russia, South America (Peru, Brazil, and Eastern Mexico), and Australia (from Urabunna in the South to the Eastern Shores of the Gulf of Carpentaria).

  The World Health Organization estimates that 80 million girls and women in more than 30 countries of Africa, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia are circumcised. The practice spans socioeconomic, ethnic, and cultural groups including Christians, Muslims, and followers of indigenous African religions.

• Misplaced Pages, citing Bishop 1997:

• On October 7, 1993, Congresswoman Patricia Schroeder introduced bill HR 3247, which prohibits genital mutilation of girls within the United States. It provides education to immigrant communities on the health risks and legal liabilities of the practice . As of today, this bill has not been passed. The Women’s Health Equity Act (HR 3075, sections 261 through 263) proposes criminal penalties for all medically unnecessary female genital mutilations and for the Secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services to undertake education and outreach activities. Some patients argue that if it becomes illegal for health professionals to perform the procedure, they will turn to unskilled workers who will perform the procedure under unsterile conditions .

• Bishop 1997, p. 235:

• On October 7, 1993, Congresswoman Patricia Schroeder introduced bill HR 3247, which prohibits genital mutilation of girls within the United States. It provides education to immigrant communities on the health risks and legal liabilities of the practice. As of today, this bill has not been passed. The Women's Health Equity Act (HR 3075, sections 261 through 263) proposes criminal penalties for all medically unnecessary female genital mutilations and for the Secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services to undertake education and outreach activities. Some patients argue that if it becomes illegal for health professionals to perform the procedure, they will turn to unskilled workers who will perform the procedure under unsterile conditions.

Black 1995

• Misplaced Pages, citing Black 1995:

• During the past three or four decades, ethnic groups who practice FGM have immigrated to Britain, mainly as refugees. The main groups are from Eritrea, Ethiopia, Somalia, and the Yemen. It has been estimated that in their own countries over 80% of women have had the operation. There is evidence that the operation is being performed illegally in Britain by medically qualified or unqualified practitioners and that children are being sent abroad for a “holiday” to have it done . In Britain the procedure is usually performed between the ages of 7 and 9 years. The Prohibition of Female Circumcision Act of 1985 outlawed the practice of FGM in the United Kingdom . Under this act it is an offense to “excise, infibulate, or otherwise mutilate the whole or any part of the labia majora or labia minora or clitoris of another person,” or, “to aid, abet, or procure the performance of another person of any of these acts on that person’s own body.” . A person found guilty of an offense if liable to a fine or to imprisonment for up to give years, or to both, if convicted on indictment before a judge and jury in a crown court. In Britain there have been no prosecutions under the act, but convictions have been obtained in France .

• Black 1995, pp. 1590 and 1591:

• During the past three or four decades, ethnic groups who practise female genital mutilation have immigrated to Britain, mainly as refugees. The main groups are from Eritrea, Ethiopia, Somalia, and the Yemen. It has been estimated that in their own countries over 80% of women have had the operation, which is invariably infibulation. There is evidence that the operation is being performed illegally in Britain (see below) by medically qualified or unqualified practitioners and that children are being sent abroad for a "holiday" to have it done. In Britain the procedure is usually performed between the ages of 7 and 9 years (p. 1590).

  Female genital mutilation was made illegal in Britain by the Prohibition of Female Circumcision Act 1985. Under this act it is an offence to "excise, infibulate, or otherwise mutilate the whole or any part of the labia majora or labia minora or clitoris of another person," or, "to aid, abet, or procure the performance of another person of any of these acts on that person’s own body." A person found guilty of an offence if liable to a fine or to imprisonment for up to five years, or to both, if convicted on indictment before a judge and jury in a crown court ... In Britain there have been no prosecutions under the act, but convictions have been obtained in France (p. 1591).

Gallard 1995

• Misplaced Pages, citing Black 1995 in error (the source is Gallard 1995, p. 1593, an article underneath Black's):

• Today in France, ministries and public institutions feel directly involved. Prevention kits (posters and leaflets) have recently been published and distributed by the prefecture of the Ile de France as a result of the work of several associations . Now used only in the Paris area, this material will soon be available all over France. At the moment an estimated 100,000 immigrants live in the Paris region. If only half of these women are excised it can be said that 20,000 women and 12,500 girls living in France have either suffered female genital mutilation or will do so. Of these, 90% live in the Ile de France region; most are from Mali, a few from Senegal .

• Gallard 1995, p. 1593:

• Today, ministries and public institutions feel directly involved. Prevention kits (posters and leaflets) have recently been published and distributed by the prefecture of the Ile de France as a result of the work of several associations. Now used only in the Paris area, this material will soon be available all over France. ...

  At the moment an estimated 100,000 immigrants live in the Paris region. ...

  If only half of these women are excised it can be said that 20,000 women and 12,500 girls living in France have either suffered female genital mutilation or will do so. Of these, 90% live in the Ile de France (Paris region); most are from Mali, a few from Senegal.

Kaplan-Marcusan 2009

• Misplaced Pages, citing Kaplan-Marcusan 2009 for the first sentence:

• The first cases of FGM in Spain were detected and reported by healthcare professionals in 1993. Since then, new mutilations have not been reported in Spain, although it is known that some families take advantage of vacation trips to their countries of origin to carry out FGM . From the national census, from countries in which these practices are carried out, residing in Spain in 2005, it is estimated that around 9,545 women have undergone some type of FGM and approximately 3,824 girls are at an age of risk of having this done within the next few years.

• Kaplan-Marcusan 2009:

• The first cases of FGM in Spain were detected and reported by healthcare professionals in 1993. Since then, new mutilations have not been reported in Spain, although it is known that some families take advantage of vacation trips to their countries of origin to carry out FGM. From the national census, from countries in which these practices are carried out, residing in Spain in 2005, we have estimated that in our country around 9,545 women have undergone some type of FGM and approximately 3,824 girls are at an age of risk of having this done within the next few years.

Ab Rahman Isa 1999

• Misplaced Pages, citing Ab Rahman Isa 1999:

• Several recent publications by Toubia et al, which have reviewed existing data on FGM, indicate that although female genital practices are said to be carried out among some Muslims in Malaysia, it is not clear whether these are ‘non-cutting’ rituals, similar to those found in Indonesia, or a form of clitoridectomy .

• Ab Rahman Isa 1999:

• Several recent publications by Toubia et al, which have reviewed existing data on FGM, indicate that although female genital practices are said to be carried out among some Muslims in Malaysia, it is not clear whether these are ‘non-cutting’ rituals, similar to those found in Indonesia, or a form of clitoridectomy.

Kane 2000

• Misplaced Pages, citing Kane 2000 for two of the sentences:

• An estimated 120,000 women living in Australia came from countries where some form of female circumcision is traditional . Despite efforts by many of these countries to eliminate the traditions – efforts which are showing some success – continuing migration to Australia of girls and women who have undergone circumcision means that numbers will remain fairly substantial for some time.

  In 1994 the Family Law Council prepared a report for the Attorney-General recommending a two-part strategy of education and legislation to prevent the practice of FGM within Australia . Most states and territories now have legislation specifically banning FGM, and there have been both commonwealth and state/territory education initiatives involving the potentially affected communities and health professionals. However, not all health professionals have the training to identify and respond to the health and psychological needs of those women and girls who have undergone FGM outside Australia.

• Kane 2000, p. 169:

• An estimated 120,000 women living in Australia came from countries where some form of female circumcision is traditional (Gilbert et al. 1997). Despite efforts by many of these countries to eliminate the tradition—efforts which are showing some success—continuing migration to Australia of girls and women who have undergone circumcision means that numbers will remain fairly substantial for some time. ...

  In 1994 the Family Law Council prepared a report for the Attorney-General recommending a two-part strategy of education and legislation to prevent the practice of FGM within Australia. Most states and territories now have legislation specifically banning FGM, and there have been both commonwealth and state/territory education initiatives involving the potentially affected communities and health professionals (Gilbert et al. 1997). However, not all health professionals have the training to identify and respond to the health and psychosocial needs of those women and girls who have undergone FGM outside Australia.

Given the above, the "by region" section ought to be removed; a lot of it was problematic for other reasons too. Anyone wanting to restore it should first check it against the sources, rewrite as needed, and make sure that the sources are appropriate and that the material isn't already covered in the article. SlimVirgin 16:10, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

I've removed the material that was added here on March 18. Another student made this edit that day about Africa. I've left that in the article for now, but some of it is problematic. For example, the material about Wanzo, the evil power, was unsourced when added. Someone later added a source to the end of the paragraph, but Wanzo isn't in it; I can see a source for it on Google Books, but it isn't cited anywhere in the article. There are similar issues elsewhere. SlimVirgin 16:33, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

The practice's global distribution is now totally skewed. One gets the impression that FGM/FGC/FC is at its origin a Pan-African practice when this could not be further from the truth. In reality, female circumcision dates back to Pharaonic times and was originally exclusive to the ancient Afro-Asiatic communities of the Red Sea littoral. It only later spread to other populations inhabiting other parts of the continent; in many cases as recently as the 18th century. This is why there exist documents dating from antiquity which describe the practice being customary in Northeast Africa, but nowhere else on the continent. This is also why several excised Egyptian female mummies have been uncovered. The global distribution of the custom will therefore have to be re-written and re-added. Because as it is, way too much weight has been placed on Sub-Saharan Africa. If editors here are unwilling to do that, that's okay. I will request administrative help in this endeavour. Middayexpress (talk) 18:25, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

1. ^ Female genital mutilation. T. L. Bishop. Journal of the National Medical Association, Vol. 89, No. 4, (April 1997), pp. 233-236
2. ^ Female Genital Mutilation in Britain. J. A. Black, et al. BMJ: British Medical Journal, Vol. 310, No. 6994, (June 17, 1995), pp. 1590 – 1594
3. Cite error: The named reference a was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
4. Perception of primary health professionals about Female Genital Mutilation: from healthcare to intercultural competence. Adriana Kaplan-Marcusan et al. BMC Health Services Research. (January 2009)
5. Cite error: The named reference m was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
6. ^ Challenges to Reproductive Health in Australia. Penny Kane. Journal of Population Research, Vol. 17, No. 2, (November 2000), pp. 163 – 173

• All unassessed articles
• B-Class Human rights articles
• Mid-importance Human rights articles
• WikiProject Human rights articles
• B-Class Sexology and sexuality articles
• Mid-importance Sexology and sexuality articles
• WikiProject Sexology and sexuality articles
• B-Class medicine articles
• Mid-importance medicine articles
• All WikiProject Medicine pages
• B-Class Gender studies articles
• Unknown-importance Gender studies articles
• WikiProject Gender studies articles
• B-Class Feminism articles
• Mid-importance Feminism articles
• WikiProject Feminism articles
• B-Class Women's History articles
• Mid-importance Women's History articles
• All WikiProject Women-related pages
• WikiProject Women's History articles
• B-Class Anthropology articles
• Mid-importance Anthropology articles