 | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
 | Cisnormativity has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: December 18, 2023. (Reviewed version). |
Western gender binary edit
What is a "western" gender binary? Is it different to the east? Can we drop the word "Western"? 67.83.108.122 (talk) 18:03, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
- Done; it makes more sense without it and it isn't the place for commentary on where a gender binary does or does not apply - though I'll note that the gender binary is most certainly not restricted to the West. Crossroads -talk- 23:25, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
- The reason I had it like that is quite simply that that's what the source says. I'm not that attached to that nuance, though. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 20:27, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
GA Review edit
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Cisnormativity/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: FenrisAureus (talk · contribs) 11:14, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
GA review edit
Last updated: 06:01, 19 December 2023 (UTC) by FenrisAureus
See what the criteria are and what they are not
1) Well-written
1a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct
- 1b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation
2) Verifiable with no original research
- 2a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline
- 2b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose)
- 2c) it contains no original research
- Sources spot checked for reliability and NOR:
— FenrisAureus ▲ (she/they) (talk) 02:07, 22 December 2023 (UTC)Ref # pass/fail 4 ✓ Pass 15 ✓ Pass 16 ✓ Pass 23 ✓ Pass 28 ✓ Pass
- 2d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism
- Earwig score 2% similarity. [1] Plagarism highly unlikely. — FenrisAureus ▲ (she/they) (talk) 02:07, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
3) Broad in its coverage
- 3a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic
- 3b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style)
4) Neutral:
- 4) Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each
5) Stable:
- 5) Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute
6) Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio
- 6a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content
- 6b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions
Overall: 
Looks good to me. Pass.— FenrisAureus ▲ (she/they) (talk) 07:41, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Comments:
Full body scanners edit
It might be worth adding something to the article in the consequences section about those TSA Full body Scanners. See: Full body scanner#Treatment of transgender people and the bibliography of this video for sources on the topic.— FenrisAureus ▲ (she/they) (talk) 06:01, 19 December 2023 (UTC)