Talk:Hirsutism
Wikipedia is not censored. Images or details contained within this article may be graphic or otherwise objectionable to some readers, to ensure a quality article and complete coverage of its subject matter. For more information, please refer to Wikipedia's content disclaimer regarding potentially objectionable content and options for not seeing an image. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
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 Hirsutism.
|
These
[edit]These unnecessary photographs of nude people in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hair_growth are gross and offensive, not just to me, but any children that may stumble upon the article. Thanks.
- Uh, now the image of the hairy person is deleted. Does someone want to put up another one? Santorummm 00:19, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not censored. Please discuss on talk page before deleting images. This is a good article to have pictures for. Not everyone knows what this looks like. Please add more, someone. User:Svartulfr1 07:31 25 August 2006 (UTC)
The article is informative and helpful as it is. Those with geninue interest in the subject matter are aware of the symptoms and unwanted hair appearance. Photos are unnecessary and inapproriate.
Paprsek 17:22, 20 May 2007 (UTC)paprsek
- A Picture is worth a thousand words —Preceding unsigned comment added by Khwerz (talk • contribs) 20:19, 10 December 2009
- Do not remove content simply because it offends you personally. As said above me, "A Picture is worth a thousand words," and perfectly illustrates this condition. This kind of attitude only invigorates the false assumption that hair is wrong.
- 83.60.103.46 (talk) 12:49, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Treatment
[edit]Wikipedia is not the place to be recommending treatment for diseases, especially treatment with specific dosages and no caveats. Furthermore, the information was incorrect (follicular phase is 10-16 days, not 5 days) and unreferenced/unsourced ("recent studies have shown..."). Antelan talk 05:25, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
The picture is offensive to people with this condition! ~~
- But that is a point of view, not a hard fact. I am rather hirsute and do not find the image (whichever one of two it is) offensive at all; on the contrary, the only people I have known to be offended by such a thing were people who do NOT have it.
I don't believe Wikipedia is a vessel for opinions, however many of them might slip in and be published on it. Therefore the picture ought to remain unless another one has been found that adequately demonstrates hirsutism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.63.161.79 (talk) 17:51, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Picture
[edit]Can we find some better pictures for this article? The picture at the end of the article is a drawing of an animal like women- it doesn't accurately illustrated Hirsutism.. Could we get a picture of [Jennifer Miller] or another woman with hirsutism (it shouldn't be that hard as 10% of women have hirsutism!) CelticLabyrinth (talk) 06:38, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
[1] is clearly more helpful in illustrating the lemma. Nemissimo (talk) 12:25, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Disorder
[edit]Why is hair a disorder when it grows on a person identified as a woman?
– I'm pretty sure the reason it is considered a "disorder" is because it is a symptom of some serious illnesses, such as PCOS and cancer. Obviously! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.229.92.58 (talk) 21:34, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
- That, and it doesn't say it is a disorder in the article, merely that it could be a symptom of some underlying condition. Feminazi = fail. 76.99.184.133 (talk) 15:21, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
- The Concise Oxford English Dictionary defines hirsutism as "Medicine: abnormal growth of hair on a woman's face and body." Any derived usage outside of the field of Medicine doesn't automatically redefine the word. I feel that using the word "disorder" implies something that isn't necessarily true. As the article states, hirsutism can be idiopathic. I'm not so sure that hirsutism is the same thing as hypertrichosis, even though the entry under "Disorders of skin appendages" at the foot of the page seems to say it is.
--208.63.161.79 (talk) 16:05, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- I'd guess that hormonally, women just aren't supposed to grow that amount of hair. 67.194.191.111 (talk) 03:06, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
2019 @ 2010: Remember when people used feminazi as an insult because they considered Nazism a bad thing? Those were the days — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.91.177.108 (talk) 03:39, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
Reference
[edit]Here is a new good ref [2] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:55, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Uncited material in need of citations
[edit]I am moving the following uncited material here until it can be properly supported with inline citations of reliable, secondary sources, per WP:V, WP:CS, WP:IRS, WP:PSTS, WP:BLP, WP:NOR, et al. This diff shows where it was in the article. Nightscream (talk) 13:49, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
|
Wiki Education assignment: UCSF SOM Inquiry In Action-- Wikipedia Editing 2022
[edit]This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 8 August 2022 and 20 September 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rafaelverduzco, Ddsov, Annalpark (article contribs). Peer reviewers: WagMed, Pixie9881.
— Assignment last updated by Rafaelverduzco (talk) 18:15, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Include a accurate photo representation of hirsutism. Ddsov (talk) 15:44, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- Plan:
- A - will edit the Treatment section to provide more structure.
- D - will add visual representation, and add diagnosis criteria.
- R - will edit and add to the pathophysiology/causes. Annalpark (talk) 18:27, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
- Some critical information had been missing from this page and you have really corrected many flaws, especially adding non-hyperandrogenism causes to hirsutism, non-pharmacologic therapies, and a realistic photograph of what hirsutism looks like. The explanation of Ferriman-Galwey Score cutoffs is especially helpful in that it is both a factual description of a diagnostic tool and it points to the variability of normal, physiologic hair distribution for those who may be "Doctor Google"-ing. 2601:645:8080:D9D0:FC7E:9C07:F957:648A (talk) 00:02, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
Menopause
[edit]There is no mention of menopause anywhere on this page, despite menopause nearly always causing some hair growth. Well over half of women above 60 have some amount of facial hair for example, though is usually somewhat peach-fuzzy. But elsewhere is normal.
That this is ignored is a pretty enormous error... 90.242.180.26 (talk) 13:06, 17 June 2024 (UTC)