Talk:Vaginectomy

So
So what's there after the surgery? If they take out a hole, what is ther instead? (Forgive my somewhat troublesome language, I can't think of another way to put it...) --Shunra


 * Your "troublesome language" is much less of a problem than your incredible lack of knowledge about the human body. There is more to a vagina than a "hole". Ward3001 (talk) 15:35, 19 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm a decade too late, but your decision to criticise their ignorance rather than fix it annoyed me more than the pointlessness of responding. The vagina is a tube attached to a closed bag (the uterus); vaginectomy is the removal of this tube. Since the uterus and most of the vagina are removed during vaginectomy, this does leave a hole behind at the top of whatever remains of the tube, or at the vulva if the whole thing was removed. I'd assume they simply sew this shut. Afterwards the patient will either have no vagina, a very shallow vagina, or an artificial new vagina constructed out of similar tissue such as intestine. 82.23.115.237 (talk) 04:20, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Why does "colpectomy" redirect here?
Term not used or explained in article. 86.159.197.174 (talk) 03:45, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Foundations II
— Assignment last updated by Kieu-My Huynh (talk) 21:45, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

References Check:

Pollyanna looked at 1-8

Kristi looked at 9-16

DJ looked at 17-24

Triet looked at 25-31

All reference formatting reviewed by DJ.

TNgo UCSFPharmD (talk) 17:37, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Foundations II 2022 Group Vaginectomy proposed edits
We will add: Vaginectomy

Uses (or Medical uses if clarification is required)

Contra-indications

Risks/Complications

Technique (avoid step-by-step instructions)

Recovery or Rehabilitation

History (e.g., when it was invented) TNgo UCSFPharmD (talk) 22:09, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Society and culture (includes legal issues, if any)

--Pleung2022 (talk) 21:35, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Group 21 Peer Review
Part 1:

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

Yes, the group's edits have substantially added more information and updated sources. Cchiu5 (talk) 09:24, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, the group's edits have substantially improved the article Pnguyen12 (talk) 16:37, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, the group's edits have substantially improved the article by adding relevant information to the topic.Kieu-My Huynh (talk) 16:46, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

The group's edits do improve the article substantially because of all the newly added information. They were able to add sections that go a little more in depth than what it was previously. In addition, the group adds necessary citations that readers can refer back to and find even more in depth information regarding the topic. Trevororot (talk) 16:54, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

2. Has the group achieved its overall goals for improvement?

Yes, the group has achieved its overall goals, which included adding new sections proposed on the talk page. Cchiu5 (talk) 09:24, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, the group has added more uses, technique, history and special populations. The group also expanded risks/complications Pnguyen12 (talk) 16:37, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, the group has achieved its overall goals that they listed in their proposal sections.Kieu-My Huynh (talk) 16:46, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

I believe the group achieved their overall goals except for adding a section on society and culture and its associated legal issues. To further improve the article, I would suggest being more general in the leading section. Much of the leading section talks about vaginectomy as a use for gender affirming surgery and not much on the use for vaginal cancer. Other than that, I believe this article is in great shape! Trevororot (talk) 16:54, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

3a. Does the draft submission reflect a neutral point of view?

Yes, a neutral point of view is present throughout the article. Cchiu5 (talk) 09:24, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

3b. Are the points included verifiable with cited secondary sources that are freely available?

Yes, almost all of the points made are verifiable with cited secondary sources that are freely available. The only source that I am worried about people being able to access is the first citation "Taber's cyclopedic medical dictionary." It seems like people have to have access to a library to obtain the information. Trevororot (talk) 17:05, 1 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you Trevor! I have removed this citation and added a more accessible reference for this citation. DHouston, UCSF PharmD Candidate (talk) 16:28, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

3c. Are the edits formatted consistent with Wikipedia’s manual of style?

Yes, the edits are formatted consistently with Wikipedia's MOS for medicine-related articles described as below: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Medicine-related_articlesKieu-My Huynh (talk) 16:46, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

3d. Do the edits reflect language that supports diversity, equity, and inclusion?

In general, the edits reflect the language that supports DEI. The article also uses the word "patient" several times, which can be changed. Pnguyen12 (talk) 16:37, 1 August 2022 (UTC) Cchiu5 (talk) 09:24, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Reference Review
I reviewed all of our sources and compared them to Kscien's predatory journal/publisher list and ensured that none of our references were on the list. Furthermore, I reviewed our references for correct date formatting and proper PMID citing for journals. DHouston, UCSF PharmD Candidate (talk) 17:37, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Summary of edits made to references: Pleung2022 (talk) 18:10, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * removed UpToDate (was previously reference #8)
 * added PMID
 * Frey JD, et al. (2017) #3
 * Walton AB, et al. (2021) #4
 * Bizic M, et al. (2020) #5
 * Heston AL, et al. (2019) #6
 * Medina, Carlos, et al. (2018) #8
 * Rohrmann, Dorothea, et al. (2003) #26
 * Edited publication dates to include year -
 * Kulkarni A, et al. (2022) #1
 * Metoidioplast.net (2020) #2
 * Frey JD, et al. (2017) #3
 * Walton AB, et al. (2021) #4
 * Bizic M, et al. (2020) #5
 * Heston AL, et al. (2019) #6
 * Frega A, et al. (2013) #10
 * McArdle A, et al. (2012) #11
 * Falcone M, et al. (2021) #12
 * Yao A, et al. (2018) #13
 * Kaur M, et al. (2014) #14
 * Bustos VP, et al. (2021) #24
 * Coulter M, et al. (2022) #25
 * Medina, Carlos, et al. (2018) #8
 * Rohrmann, Dorothea, et al. (2003) #26
 * Muffly TM, et al. (2011) #28
 * Ling B, et al. (2008) #29
 * Zambelli D, et al. (2022) #9
 * Ogden JA, et al. (2020) #30