User talk:Brookeenglish/Transgender healthcare

References section
Good start on the References section for your draft on Transgender healthcare. There are various advantages to using citation templates such as Citation and cite book instead of free-from citations, including standardized presentation, and useful automated wikilinks. A big advantage is in the use of short footnotes, a more advanced topic that you can read about.

For starters, I've added a templatized version of your first citation (Bachmann & Mussman, 2015) right below it in your user draft article. I've reproduced it below both in  format so you can see the encoding, as well as how it looks on the page:



Note that I've added missing fields not present in your version, including issn, month, pages, pmid, doi and access date. (You can put the parameters in any order you want, but the rendered output will be standardized to the correct order.) This template produces the following citation:



If you can alter the other references in your article in the same way, that will benefit the article. I may have some more comments on the specific references later. Oh, if you have access to JSTOR, please add the jstor id as well, I've left the parameter blank above. Mathglot (talk) 21:58, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Improvements
Hi. Your draft is starting to take shape. Well done! Here are some ideas you can use to improve it and get it ready to move to article space. If you can make some changes along these guidelines, I think it will do much to improve your draft. (These comments cover .) Mathglot (talk) 20:11, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
 * The article organization is somewhat unfocused in that it isn't clear about whether or when it's covering transitional health care, or more general health-care post-transition that isn't specifically about assisting the transition process.
 * Read the Wikipedia guidelines about the Lead paragraph and apply them, notably in connection with the lead being a summary of the main article and not introducing new info not covered elsewhere. For example, the lead mentions "violence" and "abuse" but the article never discusses these topics, so it is inappropriate to mention these in the lead.
 * In addition, although it's okay to include footnotes in the lead (as you did), for non-controversial items it's not necessary, since everything in the lead should already correspond to sourced material in the article. So you don't have to duplicate the references in the lead.  This would be applicable after the previous point is handled.
 * Check the WP:LAYOUT guideline in particular MOS:APPENDIX for additional footer sections that might be appropriate, such as See also, Further reading, and Nav templates for example, and follow the LAYOUT guideline for the proper order of these sections. You can consult other articles related to Transgender topics to see how they do it, for example, Gender dysphoria.
 * Add some relevant WP:CATEGORIES at the bottom of the article. Again, see how related articles do it.  For now, use the "colon syntax" (leading colon) in your categories so that your draft doesn't become categorized in article space yet, and then remove the colon just before submitting it.  See So you made a userspace draft.
 * Please add the  template to the #References section as explained in WP:FOOTNOTES and at Reflist, and consider adding the width param (30em is typical).

Healthcare for transgender youth
The section #Healthcare for transgender youth seems weak. The following areas could use improvement: Mathglot (talk) 20:41, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Currently, half the lead paragraph is about presentation and pronouns; is this really relevant to "health care" per se? (If yes, then make the case for it, and source it.)
 * The section suffers from the same lack of focus (transition prep? general health care?) as the article itself.
 * The lead sentence of the section concerning limited options available needs a citation (unless already covered by Chen & Hidalgo).
 * Concerning the title of the section: generally, you don't have to repeat words from the article title, in the section name.  See MOS:SECTIONS.
 * Subsection heading level: While it's appropriate to include a #Controversy subsection as you have done, normally the containing section should be meatier, so the information about the controversy can be in counterpoint to and in the context of the info just presented. But currently "Controversy" is longer than the main section so it's hard to know what the "non-controversial" or more mainstream context is, and how much weight to give the controversy/-ies.  In addition, if there are controversies concerning adult tg healthcare as well, as I believe there are, then you might consider promoting the #Controversy section to an H2 header  rather than having it subsumed under the transgender youth section.