This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Science and Academia This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is supported by the science and academia work group. An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article. Sexology and sexuality Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. LGBTQ+ studies: Person This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies This article is supported by the LGBTQ+ Person task force. Medicine: Psychiatry Low‑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 Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Psychiatry task force. Psychology This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Women writers Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. 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 writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

User:MarionTheLibrarian has recently removed a number of reliably-sourced statements from the article involving Bradley's work on gender identity disorder. I'd like to discuss this here. Generally, we don't remove reliable sources, but if there is an opposing view, we balance the two. Jokestress (talk) 19:00, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jokestress created a bio page for someone whose ideas she has misrepresented and opposed off-wiki. Jokestress provided greatly undue weight to the issues on which Jokestress opposes the subject, ignoring all other aspects of the person. She is merely creating more WP pages to match her personal website (tsroadmap.com) wherever she can.

—MarionTheLibrarian (talk) 19:32, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried to create a neutral balanced biography (about the 900th such article I have created here). The intro notes she is best known for childhood GID. We should discuss details of that in the body of the article. If you feel there was undue weight, please provide balancing material so the full scope of the coverage is reflected. Jokestress (talk) 19:40, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No number of articles on neutral topics can protect one from creating biased ones about one's topic of sociopolitical interest.

If you really are interested in creating encyclopedic entries for Bradley or Zucker or Drescher, then you will enjoy doing your own homework instead of being content with pasting in the same old text. Creating pages just to have new pots for old venom is POV-pushing, not knowledge sharing.

—MarionTheLibrarian (talk) 20:21, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Again, your ongoing accusations constitute incivility and personal attacks and do nothing to improve the articles. Let's discuss content and come to a compromise. If you have reliably-sourced information to include that you feel balances the article, please add it rather than removing reliably-sourced information. Jokestress (talk) 20:32, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing I have written is a personal attack. A series of edits to BLPs, however, all pasting in the same text, all containing undue weight towards the same political agenda, all of whom are involved in one's off-wiki behavior, violates BLP and COI.

—MarionTheLibrarian (talk) 20:40, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps once we get the Reparative therapy for gender variance article set up, or whatever the final title is, we can simply wikilink to that and minimize the discussions. Also, the protest at the Bradley retrospective was newsworthy enough to be covered in the local press. Is there a reason we should not include that news item? Is there a better one? Jokestress (talk) 20:48, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect you will have trouble finding non-involved editors who will believe it to merit mention. In fact, I suspect you will have trouble finding non-involved editors who will believe that Susan Bradley merits a page at all.

Meanwhile, the sex reassignment pages (where a person in early-stage transition is likely to look) remain almost entirely unreferenced.

—MarionTheLibrarian (talk) 21:10, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you believe Susan Bradley is non-notable, feel free to propose the article for deletion. Bradley appears to meet several notability requirements, though. As far as covering the topic about which she is most notable, what sources do you feel better represent her work and approach, etc.? Jokestress (talk) 21:29, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's neither what I wrote, nor meant.

—MarionTheLibrarian (talk) 21:40, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK. What sources do you feel better represent her work and approach, etc.? Jokestress (talk) 21:57, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the article there is a long quote from psychologist Darryl Hill, stating, "Zucker and Bradley believe that reparative treatments (encouraging the child to accept their natal sex and associated gender) can be therapeutic for several reasons. [...]" Three remarks about this line. (1) The definition of "reparative treatment" in the quote is at odds with what reparative therapy, or conversion therapy, is commonly understood to mean. (2) Conversion therapy in its proper sense was never advocated by Dr. Kenneth Zucker. (3) The reference to the source is not to a specific page.Retal (talk) 16:48, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]