Talk:Sibling/Archive 1

Rare Relationships
"It is possible to have a sibling that is more than a half sibling but less than a full sibling. For example, if one of the child's parent's dies and the surviving parent marries a sibling of the deceased spouse and they have a child, the two children would be three-quarter siblings to each other. They would share one parent in common but share all four grandparents. Essentially, the two children would be half siblings through one parental line and first cousins through the other parental line."


 * It is my motion that this tract be deleted from the article. When doing research, it is next to impossible to come across any material referring to this set-up as "three-quarter siblings."  Just because you may share all four grandparents in common does not make you any more a sibling to someone than a run-of-the-mill half-sibling.  Your proximity of relationship to your siblings is determined by your parents, and if you share one parent with someone, they are your half-sibling.  Even if your father happens to be the uncle of your half-sister, that is irrelevant for definitional purposes.  Half-sibling is included in this article because it is a widely-used term; three-quarter sibling is most certainly not, as even light research will reveal.  --TheTriumvir 12:55, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, it's certainly interesting, and one need only the most basic understanding of genetics to know that such a sibling would certainly share a much closer genetic relationship than normal. If the term isn't used it can simply be written "three quarter sibling". Richard001 00:10, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Sibling Discussion
The link with the Dutch "Broer" is not correct. In Dutch you have the words Broer (Brother) and Zus (Sister). But there is no translation for Sibling. 213.119.117.182 18:08, 22 April 2006 (UTC)


 * And some languages don't seem to have words for just brother or just sister. For example, I believe in Thai there's phi-chai (older brother), nong-chai (younger brother), phi-sow (older sister), nong-sow (younger sister). Neither chai nor sow nor chai-sow are used. Phi-nong may be used to refer collectively to "older and yonger (brothers and sisters)" or even a group of people. Ewlyahoocom 19:59, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Say Sue and Jeff each had a half-sister (Mary) in common. However, Sue has Mary's mother - while Jeff has Mary's father. What kind of relationship would that be between Sue and Jeff? 68.117.18.6 18:38, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure whether they would even be related at all... — CliffHarris (- T | C | E -) 01:46, 2 June 2006 (UTC)


 * If I understand your question the way you understand it, then there is no blood relationship between Sue and Jeff and they are classed as step-siblings. Winnow 17:52, 5 January 2007 (UTC)


 * A former next door neighbour of mine is in the position of "Mary", and he has actually had one of his half sisters marry one of his half brothers. (No blood relationship, and raised in different countries)85.158.139.99 (talk) 14:41, 18 September 2008 (UTC)Lance Tyrell

Why is the Simple English article linking to "Sister"?

I'm lazy right now, but there is a slang use of "Bro" check urbandictionary for full description but its basically (if you live in the 909) black dickies, skin/metalmulisha/srh whatever t shirts, same brand, but tilted hiphop fashion hats and dvs/circa shoes. Also, they are huge douchebags.

Half-Sibling Discussion
"A stepsibling ... bears no blood relation" and "A half sibling ... is a sibling with one shared biological parent" contradict "... many half siblings are stepsiblings and vice versa". On a different note, is an adopted sibling considered a stepsibling?
 * This is completely inaccurate - no step-sibling is referred to as a half-sibling, and no half-sibling is referred to as a step-sibling. Half-siblings share one biological parent, and therefore if your mother remarries (for example), you do not thereafter refer to a new baby as your "step-sibling."  He or she will be your half-brother or sister, and one simply never refers to a half-sibling as a step-sibling.  Similarly, since you have to share one parent with a half-sibling by definition, a step-sibling can never be a half-sibling.  --TheTriumvir 11:57, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Adopted siblings are considered your whole-brother or sister by law. While they are not related by blood, adoption means they are your full-sibling from then on. --TheTriumvir 11:55, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Of course it's possible to have half-siblings from adoption, i.e. where one of your two adoptive parents has another (blood or adopted) child who does not share your other parent. jnestorius(talk) 11:47, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I have another question about half siblings. I know someone who married a man. The man had a child from a previous relationship. After they got married they adopted two children together. Are their two children half siblings or step siblings to his first child from the previous marriage? All of the children legally have the same father though not biologically
 * Adopted siblings are socially (ideally) and legally no different than if they were not adopted. So these two children are half-siblings to the man's other child, just as they would be if they were born to your friend and her husband. That's because they all have the same father, but your friend is the adopted children's mother, and the man's first wife is the other child's mother. --Icarus (Hi!) 09:02, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Question on Half-Siblings
As those of you who have read my profile know, I have a half-brother. The thing is I love him as a full sibling and consider him my full sibling. I'm also very close to him depsite our age difference(13-14) years. Which brings me to my question: Can half-siblings be considered full siblings even though they just share one parent? My brother's mom is like my step mom and my mom is his step mom if that contributes to anything. PLZ don't delete. This is a serious question. Animeboye 8:13, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Your question is a good one and sparks a follow-up question. Has your mother adopted your half-brother as her child?  If so, he is legally your brother and is considered such for all intents and purposes.  One thing you have to realize, though, is that the term "half-sibling" is a word intended to define a particular relationship.  While I realize that you feel closer to your half-brother than many people may feel to their full-siblings, he is still defined as your half-brother.  This does not mean at all that you two are any less close or that you two are not as close as any brothers in the world.  It is just the way that your relationship is defined.  One cannot, however, change the definition of the word "half-sibling" simply because they are extremely close to their half-sibling.  You are more than allowed to call your half-brother your brother, however, if that is what you are asking.  The law and society make virtually no distinction between full-sibling and half-sibling relationships.  --TheTriumvir 18:55, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * All right. I kinda get it. And no. My mom didn't adopt my brother. If you check out my profile, it says "he lived with his mom in Hawaii". My mom is his step mom since she married our dad. His mom is my step mom since even though my dad says they were "never together" she's still related to me in a way. Probably distant. And y'know I think having a sibling, be it a full sibling or half-slibling. Or even an adopted or step sibling is a wonderful gift. A lot of kids don't know how lucky they truly are. I'm glad to have an older brother who I can look up to and count on to help me when I need it. Even if he isn't around a lot. My friend(the "younger brother" one I mentioned) is like that too. he's got two older half-sisters who he doesn't get to see a lot. Oh and again, thanks, Trivumir. That makes me feel better. And helped me with something that's been on my mind for a while. Besides,he's been there for me more than a good majority of our family so that's also why I consider him my full sibling. 'Cuase unlike our dad's side, he really cares about me. One last thing: When you said that the term "half-sibling" is used to define a particular relationship, would that count for siblings who don't have a good reationship or don't see each other a lot? I'm just curious. Animeboye 14:22, December 6, 2006 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Animeboye (talk • contribs) 20:22, 6 December 2006 (UTC).
 * By "relationship," TheTriumvir meant "biological relationship." When you ask about people who don't see each other often, you mean "personal relationship."  The term "sibling" has a dictionary definition regarding biological relationships that has nothing to do with the personal relationships among people.  How you manage your personal relationships is entirely up to you and under your control, and there is nothing wrong with generally referring to him as your "brother" rather than your "half brother."  But if you are talking to a genealogist or a lawyer, you will probably want to use the more precise biological definition of "half brother."  Laura1822 17:35, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Irish Twins
Why does the term Irish Twins get directed here? There's no discussion of the term here. Even if someone wants to argue that the term is offensive, there should nonetheless be an explanation of the situation, a discussion of the term, and perhaps an explanation of why it's not a preferred term. As it is, it makes no sense for the redirect.
 * I searched for 'Irish Twins' today after hearing the phrase in a conversation and agree that it shouldn't redirect here unless there is any information on it here.(--BigTurnip (talk) 12:11, 6 December 2007 (UTC))


 * Hear Hear. I'm here for the same reason - I heard the phrase, looked it up, was left with utterly no explanation. Ultimately had to find an explanation on another site. TomorrowTime (talk) 08:14, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

There was originally an article on Irish twins, but it was redirected here because there was little possibility that it could ever expand beyond a dicdef stub. I've created a new section in this article by copying (and tweaking) what used to be there. --Icarus (Hi!) 10:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I added some more and asked for a source for the Irish triplets. --68.9.118.55 (talk) 00:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * It has its origins in 19th century anti-Irish Britain, and anti-Roman Catholic hatred was rife too. It spread somewhat to USA, when that country too was anti-Irish, and anti Roman-Catholic. Surely these aspects of the subject must be included if this is going to be a proper encyclopedia article? I did revert it back to its own page, but an admin did an undo78.19.202.42 (talk) 16:49, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * If you have a source for the origin, please go ahead and add it. --Icarus (Hi!) 20:34, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

People say Puerto Rican twins now. That should be put here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.116.46.98 (talk) 20:00, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * If you have a source to demonstrate that it's in wide enough usage to be notable, go ahead and add it yourself. --Icarus (Hi!) 21:14, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Two different people that share the same half-sibling
What do you call two different people that share the same half-sibling. For example lets say there was a person who had two parents and the two parents got divorced but 5 years later both persons got remarried again and a year later both persons had a baby with there new spouse. What would the relation be between the the two different people that shares the same half-sibling.Would the different people be siblings to each other or not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.80.106.105 (talk) 22:16, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * My family isn't exactly like that, but it's similar enough. Personally, I just call her my sister! I also just call our shared half-brother my brother. But there is no special word for such a relationship, as there is no connection through blood (or adoption) or through marriage. I've occasionally heard the term "quarter-sibling" proposed (half of a half, I guess) but that's not accurate as it implies you share half of a parent (one grandparent, maybe?) when there is no such connection. So I just call her my sister, and then depending on the situation I either leave it at that, say "It's a complicated mess of halves and steps," or draw out the family tree if they're really curious. When people inevitably say "So she's not really your sister?" I tell them that there may not be any legal or genetic ties, but we don't care about those technicalities: she's just my sister. --Icarus (Hi!) 22:31, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

They will still love each other
This line "Sibling rivalry usually starts right after, or before, the arrival of the second child. While siblings will still love each other, it is not uncommon for them to bicker and be malicious to each other." is one of the biggest load of dribble's I've ever heard. If the two siblings simply dont have much chemistry or no chemistry at all, they could be oblidged to tolerate each other because of the living circumstances, but they cannot be forced to love each other. Family circumstances and sibling relationships are as varied as the families themselves and some may be able to almost permemantly disagree but have some deep-down feeling of affection for each other, but just to assume that all siblings love each other is just wrong. In fact some may have near to nothing to do with each other, and they may even be at their happiest when that is the case. Just because they come out of the same woman, and have the same parents is in physical terms a mere co-incidence, how the people involved react to this situation is once again as varied as the families themselves. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.239.198.171 (talk) 04:35, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * And I say you have it inside out, because the narrow perspective of people for whom the family is a watering hole does not represent either what is common or what ought to be. --VKokielov (talk) 14:56, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * It is not the role of this encyclopedia to prescribe what family relationships should or should not be like, but rather to report on verifiable findings from reliable sources. Instead, something like the following could be used: "Sibling rivalry is often a normal part of otherwise loving sibling relationships Source. Conversely, it is occasionally a symptom of an underlying animosity or social disconnect between siblings Source." Such an exerpt, with sources supporting both claims, would touch on both possibilities without having to bring in editors' personal experiences, general impressions or observations, or philosophical ideals - in short, their original research. --Icarus (Hi!) 20:33, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Don't lay that on me. You know as well as I do that people are not machines.  you know just as well as me that, except in articles about the smell of up quarks in the mornings this impartial encyclopedia can be turned into a means for one side to push itself on all the rest.  And what's worse, it is often done by INDIFFERENT PEOPLE.  If a king is indifferent to the epidemic that is killing his people, he can sit on his throne and write about God while they are dying in the streets.  It's the same with this encyclopedia; whoever writes about sibling rivalry in those "verifiable" terms is indifferent to the fact, obvious to any sensitive reader, that what he is writing is either strange or downright scary.
 * I am not saying that the Wikipedia policies are defective; I'm only saying that you can't be impartial when you present only one side of it or when you are sincere in defending the indefensible. Who is most likely to write about sibling rivalry?  Either someone bitter about it or someone indifferent to it.  It is abominable; it is how the whole living biography affair started.  Mark my words -- there will come a day when the indifference will pass away, and people will begin to notice that not every opinion is as good as every other, whether or not it is published in a book.  When that comes to pass, all of what is irresponsible and -- seize the blasphemer! -- immoral will start to damage the credibility of this encyclopedia.
 * All of this is besides the point -- is only a remark in passing. --VKokielov (talk) 03:18, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is many things and not many things, but they are biased as everyone is. Except, that which they're biased for is considered neutral, or 'proven'. That's why the Evolution article is taken as definite, even though the theory is self-sustaining and runs on circumstantial evidence.
 * While we're talking about blasphemy, let's listen to some combat music from Shin Megami Tensei:Nocturne.

So, allow me to make a summary: If you want to make NPOV edits on something like love or emotions between siblings, go right ahead. Scientists say it's just literally chemistry in your brain. Maybe you can find a source by cutting open a human brain and telling a newspaper. Heck, never expect humans to be impartial. This is a respository of man's knowledge, so expect it to be biased as man is. Trust me, if this was made several millenia ago, it would've said Odin was real and that the whole pantheonon regularly performed heroic deeds. Gee, sounds like I did a rant there. I might go ahead and look and see if this article meets the good prerequisites. Amatsu-Mikabushi (talk) 06:19, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Same gender siblings
Lets say there are two brothers who never stop fighting is it true that if there is one boy and one girl would that relationship seem different then same gender siblings for example if you have two sisters just because of them would you know how to deal with other girls out side your family???? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.80.106.105 (talk) 01:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I have no idea what you're talking about. Can you review it and spread some appropriate punctuation to make it clearer? 138.162.128.53 (talk) 07:36, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Diversity?
The images on this page are not diverse enough. Could we get some non-white people added? 96.232.61.55 (talk) 17:17, 15 October 2008 (UTC)


 * No
 * The pictures on this page are very nice indeed. However if someone is thinking of changing them then there are several things that would be nice to keep in mind. Of course a picture is there to illustrate the topic and several pictures should illustrate it in different ways. As noted above a non white/non western group would be good, as would a larger group than a pair, as would a mixed sex group, as would a group of adult siblings. Of course trying to fit all this in would be overkill but a bit more breadth would be welcome, I think. The existing picutre are nice though! Thehalfone (talk) 09:24, 10 April 2009 (UTC)


 * "No"? What kind of response is that? The page has 3 pictures and all of them show white people.  We're not asking that you paint all the brothers black and all the sisters white but there should be a bit of variety to be encycloapedic.  Someone who wants to know about siblings may visit the page, see that all the people are white and assume that siblings are only white and that there must be another word for non-white people who are born to the same parents--217.203.143.149 (talk) 00:26, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Half sisters siblings
My dad had a daughter with his ex wife, then he had me with my mom. My sister now has half sister by her mom and step dad having children, is these children related to me at all wether half, step, any at all? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.247.125.208 (talk) 02:11, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Technically, no. There is no official word for such siblings, since you do not have any of the same biological parents at all. However, that doesn't mean that you can't consider yourselves siblings if you want to! I have a sister who is related in a similar way. It's not exactly the same as your situation, but it's similar. I don't care that we don't have any of the same DNA. She's my (half-)brother's (half-)sister, so she's my sister too! Families are defined by love, not just blood :-) --Icarus (Hi!) 04:04, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Bros.
The abbreviation (?) redirects here but the term "Bros." appears nowhere in the text. What does it stand for? 88.152.4.45 (talk) 19:51, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

3/4 sibling & Quarter sibling?
Do we have anything do back those up? I know that the the term “3/4 sibling” is used in animal breeding, even if they are not '3/4 sibling' by DNA. But we still need something to back it up. But there is no such thing as “Quarter sibling” as for as I know.--Lord Don-Jam (talk) 12:15, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * No one has goten back to me on this so if no one gets back to me soon, I shall take “Quarter sibling” out.--Lord Don-Jam (talk) 10:30, 7 March 2010 (UTC)