Talk:Posthectomy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Robert the Bruce will you please stop deleting information and references just because you don't like them? —Ashley Y 09:00, 2005 Jan 16 (UTC)

  • Ashley Y will you please stop inserting information and references into articles so as to promote the anti-circumcision/foreskin admirer agenda. - Robert the Bruce 09:06, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Whether or not a posthectomy involves removing the ridged band is clearly relevant information. Please stop deleting it. The "anti-circumcision agenda" is no more than ordinary medical concern. And please read this if you haven't already. Note in particular this (emphasis mine):
The neutral point of view policy is easily misunderstood. The policy doesn't assume that it's possible to write an article from just a single unbiased, "objective" point of view. The policy says that we should fairly represent all sides of a dispute, and not make an article state, imply, or insinuate that any one side is correct.
Ashley Y 09:09, 2005 Jan 16 (UTC)
  • OK so what you are saying is that it is important for anti-circumcision activists/foreskin admirers that the loss of the so-called ridged band is mentioned? I'll fix that. - Robert the Bruce 09:12, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)
No, the loss or not of the ridged band is relevant information no matter to whom it's important. Also please read this if you haven't already. —Ashley Y 09:29, 2005 Jan 16 (UTC)
  • Relevant to whom? The so-called ridged band is part of the foreskin so it is self evident that if the foreskin is removed then so is the other thing. It is only anti-circumcision activists/foreskin admirers that demand it gets a special mention. - Robert the Bruce 09:33, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Since this article is distinguishing one kind of circumcision from another it's useful to specify exactly what gets cut and what doesn't as precisely as possible.—Ashley Y 09:38, 2005 Jan 16 (UTC)

Proposed Redirect[edit]

This article claims that posthectomy is a specific type of circumcision. I can find no evidence for this. Posthetomy (note the correct spelling) is merely an obsolete synonym for circumcision. I can therefore see no reason for the term to have it's own page, and therefore propose that we redirect to circumcision. - Jakew 11:08, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)