User:UncleDouggie/sandbox

This is a sandbox for a topic I will be posting eventually at WP:ELN. Please don't comment on it while I'm developing it.

Paraphilia dispute
I'm asking editors to please help resolve a lengthy debate over two ELs for the paraphilia article, neither of which is currently in the article. I've tried to include all relevant information in this summary section. More details are available in the original noticeboard discussion and the article talk if needed. Efforts to resolve this at the article talk page and project page have failed due to low participation of uninvolved editors. Possible outcomes are:
 * 1) Both ELs fail WP:EL.
 * 2) Only one EL complies with WP:EL.
 * 3) Both ELs comply with WP:EL and should be in the article.
 * 4) Both ELs comply with WP:EL, however, one is better than the other and assuming that it is included, the second EL would add no additional value.
 * 5) An alternative EL should be included (this would be in addition to one of the above solutions for the ELs in question).

A related issue is whether more material about the role of questionnaires should be added to the article to provide additional context for the EL(s). Such material would need references to secondary reliable sources, for which the ELs in question don't qualify because they are the actual questionnaires.

There are similar EL issues in related articles. If we can do a good job solving this dispute, perhaps there is hope for also solving the other long running debates.

EPES EL
The EPES EL contains a questionnaire used in Kurt Freund’s Erotic Preferences Examination Scheme related to paraphilia scales. The questionnaire is within an article on a faculty website, in which Ray Blanchard provides an introduction to the actual scales. This EL was added by James Cantor without comment in March 2009 and was removed by BitterGrey in September 2010 per comments on the article talk page.

Google search * Google Scholar * The Handbook of Sexuality Related Measures * Sexual deviance * Homosexuality and social sex roles


 * Pros
 * The content of the questionnaire would be excessive to include on the page itself and the copyright status is unclear.
 * The EPES has 31 unique hits on Google search, one paper written by Blanchard, and a mention in three books. However, the referenced books also list other questionnaires and the last book doesn't agree exactly with the methodology used by the EPES.
 * Kurt Freund is a frequently cited researcher of the paraphilias.


 * Cons
 * James Cantor (article) has a possible conflict of interest regarding this EL in that Ray Blanchard is his colleague and Kurt Freund was Ray Blanchard's mentor. However, James Cantor is a researcher in the field and he never met Kurt Freund himself, who died in 1996. It is not necessary to derive a financial benefit from an edit to have a conflict of interest. The key question is whether such an editor has the best interests of Wikipedia foremost in mind and if their edits improve the encyclopedia. Therefore, it's up to us to evaluate the EL from the point of view of an average reader.
 * The EL may not have long-term stability.
 * There are many other questionnaires that have been used in the development of our current understanding of the paraphilias. However, many questionnaires were not published or specifically referenced.
 * The EPES could possibly have its own article and then be included in the "See also" section.

Kinsey EL
The Kinsey EL (scanned PDF) is the historical interview questionnaire used by Alfred Kinsey in his research, for which data is also available. This EL was proposed by BitterGrey on this page as an alternative to the EPES EL.


 * Pros


 * Cons

Discussion
Please keep all discussion in this section. Do not copy large sections from the original debate; instead reference the anchors that I have liberally added for this purpose. You may also reference the pros and cons for each EL by number (e.g., Kinsey Pro #1).

Do not reference the numerous personal conflicts between the involved editors. Take it to WP:RFC/U if you must. Our focus here is to solve an EL issue in the best interests of Wikipedia.

Thank you!

Continue from WP:ELN