Talk:Female genital disease

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal 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.

Women's Health Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's Health, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's Health 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's HealthWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HealthTemplate:WikiProject Women's Healthwomen's health
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Female genital disease.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

sourcing

Uniquepw I strongly encourage you to engage in discussion instead of continued reverting. Sources like this, this, this are completely unreliable and shouldn't be used. They're also blatant spam. CUPIDICAE💕 14:06, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I agree they aren't fulfilling the reliable source criteria, although I included them in good faith...I was just about to delete the sources, at an edit after 13:59, 8 March 2021, but you had again reverted. I appreciate the need though to maintain a reliable foundation for thought on the subject, by representing content attached to trustworthy sources and not adding sources which could introduce uncertainty into readers minds. I was intending to delete the sources then return the content without the source types you indicated, I suppose I'm asking if you assent to the return (I can't see any reason you wouldn't though), just a courtesy that we don't find conflict occurring. Uniquepw (talk) 14:16, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Uniquepw no consensus has been reached so please explain this. CUPIDICAE💕 16:19, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Uniquepw Please revert yourself. Your additions are not encyclopedic nor an improvement and are barely coherent, not to mention the WP:MOS issues, original research and poor sourcing. CUPIDICAE💕 16:46, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Foundations II

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 June 2023 and 11 August 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sshapiro1, Keanna Rasekhi, Emily.schwab, AimeeRussell31 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: CarUCSF2025, Kamilawrobel, Finanyohannes.

— Assignment last updated by Lynn.nguyen2 (talk) 17:56, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Foundations II 2023 Group A Proposed Edits

Under background, remove "Pathological mechanisms in the female reproductive system" due to source plagiarism. Remove corresponding reference 1.Emily.schwab (talk) 23:17, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Add more information in the background information and link corresponding wikipedia pages AimeeRussell31 (talk) 18:04, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Move "A female genital disease is a condition that affects the female reproductive system." to the "background" section. Update this sentence to say: "Female genital disease is a disorder of the structure or function of the female reproductive system that has a known cause and a distinctive group of symptoms, signs, or anatomical changes. The female reproductive system consists of the ovaries, fallopian tubes, uterus, vagina, and vulva." Add: "Female genital diseases can be classified by affected location or by type of disease, such as malformation, inflammation, or infection". Add citation.

Add subheading "Women's history in clinical trials". The goal is to bridge the gap between information about female genital disease and the lack of research on diagnosis, preventative care, and treatment for particular conditions. This will add background to our section as there is a lack of information.Keanna Rasekhi (talk) 22:34, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to classification by type of disease section: Change "Malformations can be congenital. They are classified by location of the malformation, such as uterine malformation." to "Malformations may be congenital. Malformations are classified by location, such as uterine malformation." Add citation.Emily.schwab (talk) 23:17, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Change "inflammation and/or infection" to "inflammation or infection".Emily.schwab (talk) 23:17, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to classification by location section: Remove "Alternatively, female genital diseases can be more strictly classified by location of the disease, which, in turn, can be broadly divided between diseases that affect the female internal genitalia and those that affect the female external genitalia." as this wording is confusing.Emily.schwab (talk) 23:17, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Add new subheadings:

Diseases of the vulva Diseases of the vagina Diseases of the cervix Diseases of the uterus Diseases of the fallopian tubes Diseases of the ovaries

Diseases we plan to discuss: uterine malformation, oophoritis, cervicitis, endometriosis, uterine fibroids, vaginal prolapse, ovarian cysts, bacterial vaginosis

Topics we plan to discuss for each disease: definition, etiology, epidemiology, treatments

Remove the following article from "further reading" as it is older than 5 years: Acien, P.; Acién, M. I. (2011). "The history of female genital tract malformation classifications and proposal of an updated system". Human Reproduction Update. 17 (5): 693–705. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmr021. PMID 21727142.Emily.schwab (talk) 23:17, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Added a "STI" Section with citations. Talk about the history and perception of STIs. Also added "economic burden" section AimeeRussell31 (talk) 18:07, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Add discussion of barriers to diagnosis and treatment of female genital diseaseEmily.schwab (talk) 21:54, 27 July 2023 (UTC) Add discussion of gender identity considerationsEmily.schwab (talk) 21:54, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Added Perception, vaginal prolapse, and uterine fibroids section Sshapiro1 (talk) 14:35, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review

1. Do the group’s edits substantially improve the article as described in the Wikipedia peer review “Guiding framework”? [explain]

yes, the group has improved their assigned article using the guiding framework. They have added more information to the article using reliable sources. The lead section is easy to understand and reflects the rest of the article. Finanyohannes (talk) 18:13, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply][reply]

The group has added references from multiple reliable sources such as the NIH. The group went into detail describing clinical trials, using a systematic review to compare clinical trials and the barriers in them for individuals with female genital disease. The group did a great job at referring to multiple diseases and providing thorough explanations of each. --Kamilawrobel (talk) 18:26, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply][reply]

Yes multiple sources were added along with a variety of topics within female genital disease such as: barriers, perceptions, malformation and infection.--CarUCSF2025 (talk) 18:44, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply][reply]

Question 2. Person A, Person B, Person C, and Person D each answer this question individually: Has the group achieved its overall goals for improvement? [explain]

Yes, the group added subsections by specific regions of female genital disease which was of great help and had plenty of information. The subheadings were very helpful, although could use a second source sometimes. They also included more information on barriers and the economic burden which was a great touch. --Kamilawrobel (talk) 18:26, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply][reply]

yes, the group had followed their plan in discussing some diseases associated with female genital, and they used reliable sources. Finanyohannes (talk) 18:33, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply][reply]

Yes, the article was reorganized for better flow, additional sections were added, new sources were added, and outdated sources removed.--CarUCSF2025 (talk) 18:44, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply][reply]

Question 3. Does the article meet Wikipedia guidelines? • Person A answers: Does the draft submission reflect a neutral point of view? [explain]

Somewhat, it seems the view on studies on female genital disease is that it is underrepresented and stigmatized. It can use more of a rebuttal to make it neutral, however, the sources are great.--Kamilawrobel (talk) 18:26, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply][reply]

Question 3B

Question 3C Are the edits formatted consistent with Wikipedia’s manual of style? Yes edits are formatted consistent with Wikipedia's manual of style. Proper heading and subheadings are placed as well as punctuation.--CarUCSF2025 (talk) 18:37, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply][reply]

Person B answers: Are the claims included verifiable with cited secondary sources that are freely available? [explain

yes, the group has supported their claims with reliable secondary sources such as the NIH.Finanyohannes (talk) 18:50, 1 August 2023 (UTC) CarUCSF2025 (talk) 18:53, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]