Difference between revisions of "Talk:Gender identity disorder"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(question on contribution) |
(→Iran: edit) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
Edit to mainspace says, | Edit to mainspace says, | ||
*''in Iran Gender Identity Disorder is recognized and sex reassignment therapy, and surgery is compulsory, '''and paid for by''' the state'' | *''in Iran Gender Identity Disorder is recognized and sex reassignment therapy, and surgery is compulsory, '''and paid for by''' the state'' | ||
| − | Now, the question is between the meaning of the weasel term "'''may'''" in the source document, which is a weak source to begin with, being only a news item and not [[fatwa]] or official government ruling or document, and the | + | Now, the question is between the meaning of the weasel term "'''may'''" in the source document, which is a weak source to begin with, being only a news item and not a [[fatwa]] or official government ruling or document, and the editors declaritive statement here, "'''and is paid for by'''", which presumably is some sort of support for a [[planned economy]] or [[socialized medicine]]. The credibility of the contributor is at stake here. While this is a very interesting and "enlightening" contribution, I would respectfully request an explanation as to ''why'' this distortion from the source being cited? [[User:RobS|Rob Smith]] 14:41, 15 August 2007 (EDT) |
Revision as of 18:43, August 15, 2007
Iran
Source states:
- The state health organisation may also subsidise his operations.
Edit to mainspace says,
- in Iran Gender Identity Disorder is recognized and sex reassignment therapy, and surgery is compulsory, and paid for by the state
Now, the question is between the meaning of the weasel term "may" in the source document, which is a weak source to begin with, being only a news item and not a fatwa or official government ruling or document, and the editors declaritive statement here, "and is paid for by", which presumably is some sort of support for a planned economy or socialized medicine. The credibility of the contributor is at stake here. While this is a very interesting and "enlightening" contribution, I would respectfully request an explanation as to why this distortion from the source being cited? Rob Smith 14:41, 15 August 2007 (EDT)