Talk:Gynaecology

Semi-protected edit request on 30 November 2018

Goralgandhi (talk) 04:59, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. DannyS712 (talk) 05:18, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Breast health

Why doesn’t this article mention breast health as within the purview of gynecologists? It seems like an oversight. 2601:640:8980:B847:F842:D938:20DF:1C70 (talk) 20:23, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Gynecological surgery into Gynaecology

Small stub already covered more on target page section Therapies Iztwoz (talk) 18:55, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

I feel it should be kept as separate article as the surgery article can be later expanded with content related to it. Thanks. Gardenkur (talk) 02:13, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

In order to maintain simplicity and better understanding for readers in and out the field, I feel it should not be merged but can transited into through links that could be inserted into the parent article. Xingi06 (talk) 13:00, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

There being no support for this proposal, I have removed the tags.

Gardenkur, Iztwoz's right about the surgery article being extremely short. Are you able to find a source or two and expand it at least a little? It should presumably mention common surgeries like hysterectomies as well as subspecialties like Oncogynecological surgery. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:38, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi WhatamIdoing. Request you to give me some time for expanding it. Will surely do it as there are sufficient sources with substantial coverage. Thanks. Gardenkur (talk) 03:12, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:There is no deadline for this. I'm glad to hear that you'll look into it when you can. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:23, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Tone of Sims Portion seems off

The tone of this portion of the article seems oddly defensive of Sims, maybe not exactly correct for Wikipedia, with no citations.

“Sims developed his new specialty using the bodies of enslaved women, who could not refuse the extended glance of any white male that cared to observe any part of their anatomy. They could not "consent" in the sense modern medical research requires. No one did. Sims did not use anesthesia, for which he would be severely criticized 160 years later.

At the time anesthesia was itself a research area, and the first experiments (in dentistry) were being published. Using early anesthesia (in 1845, say) was much more dangerous and difficult than it would be a century later. In addition, it was widely believed that Blacks did not feel pain as much as whites, and white women proved unable to endure the pain.” 64.89.129.23 (talk) 04:29, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

I have to agree that this section is indeed "off". I have removed one passage I considered both irrelevant and objectionable (the "No one did." of the second paragraph quoted above). There have been other edits, some of which have made the passage impenetrable. For example, the third paragraph above remains, though the sentence that precedes it, which mentions anaesthesia, has been moved forwards and refactored.. Personally, I think this whole section could be much shorter since Sims has his own page, linked to here. Krozruch (talk) 14:22, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Posture of dilating digital speculum inserted into the vagina

Why do you have to show something inserted into a vagina for this topic? A diagram of female anatomy is enough to show what is being studied. I think there are so many other ways to show what “gynecology” is. Does anyone else agree? 155.186.209.213 (talk) 14:36, 21 April 2024 (UTC)