This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Transsexual article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies
This article is part of WikiProject Gender studies. This WikiProject aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from Wikipedia. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Gender studiesWikipedia:WikiProject Gender studiesTemplate:WikiProject Gender studiesGender studies
This article was created or improved during Wiki Loves Pride, 2015.Wiki Loves PrideWikipedia:Wiki Loves PrideTemplate:Wiki Loves Pride talkWiki Loves Pride
The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article relates to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them.
Kindly remember to put new topics at the end of the page, not the top.
Vague Language Suggestion
Latest comment: 1 year ago5 comments2 people in discussion
"Jenna Talackova, the 23-year-old woman who forced Donald Trump and his Miss Universe Canada pageant to end its ban on transgender contestants"
The use if the phrase "forced" here is unprofessional and incredibly vague, this event happened through a legal proceeding that challenged pageant organizers and owners, including but not limited to Donald Trump. The office of Donald Trump released a statement allowing Jenna Talackova to compete before any court mandated decision took place and therefore no "force" was used. Language used should reflect that. 107.2.83.124 (talk) 16:04, 16 February 2025
(UTC)
Hi 107.2.83.124! The text was literally copied from the source. I changed the text, and in that copy edit, exchanged the word "forced" for "successfully challenged". About the part "including but not limited to Donald Trump", please provide a source for this. Lova Falk (talk) 10:29, 9 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
I don't directly oppose the change, but I do oppose the reason for it. Saying that the fact a judge did not finally rule on the case means that the organisation was not "forced" is akin to saying you handed your wallet to the mugger voluntarily cuz he didn't actually shiv you. The organisation was, indeed, forced by the threat (and actuality) of legal action they could not successfully overcome. The 'challenge' wording would be reasonable if this were a government body where a coequal branch of government made the decision, but 'forced' is far more accurate, professional, and specific in this context. The incessant revisionism surrounding that particular politician's misogynistic and anti-trans history is exhausting. Ta, Bitten Peach (talk) 15:28, 9 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Hi Bitten Peach. I cannot understand you are not happy by my reason to change the text. It is not because I am some kind of revisionist, it is in order to remove WP:copyvio. Please give me a good alternative to the word forced, and I put it in. Lova Falk (talk) 16:15, 9 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
No, your edit is fine, and the wording you chose is fine. I was objecting to the original comment and the IP's reasons it needed to be changed at all. Sorry that was unclear. Ta, 17:27, 9 March 2025 (UTC) Bitten Peach (talk) 17:27, 9 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 year ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Much of the content of this article is redundant with transgender. It would make more sense if this article focused specifically on the term "transsexual" (rather than the broader concept) and how use of that term differs from "transgender". Nosferattus (talk) 19:55, 6 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
I wonder that Over the Sex Border by Georgina Turtle it is not mentioned under the sources though it precedes Harry Benjamin's The Transsexual Phenomenon by 3 years.
Latest comment: 6 months ago21 comments5 people in discussion
From Daria Cabaj's contributions, she has attempted to add images of herself into multiple articles on transgender topics (Transgender sexuality, Feminizing surgery, Legal status of transgender people, and now Transsexual). All of these have been reverted, and I reverted the original edit adding it, but it went back-and-forth, and to not violate WP:3RR I've made this section.
The image she has added to this looks like a similar image to File:TransgenreatParis2005.JPG, which is included in the article, but the background blur, being created in 2025, not in 2005, when the demonstration happened, and other things make it seem unusual. There are probably other things I could mention about this, but I'm not an expert at images.
When reverting additions of the image, I voiced concerns about AI usage, and on the talk page section she made, she said that "The image is not AI-generated. It is a real photograph of a real person, with only minor post-processing (e.g. basic retouching such as smoothing skin or reducing wrinkles), similar to standard photo editing tools like Photoshop or Remini. It was not generated or altered to create a synthetic person".
I would also like to add that I am relatively new to Wikipedia and am still learning its norms and practices. I apologize for any mistakes I have made during this process.
My intention in participating here is to learn, contribute constructively, and integrate into the community — not to create conflict. I would appreciate patience, guidance, and help in understanding best practices, rather than overly harsh assumptions about my intentions. Daria Cabaj (talk) 22:43, 6 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for the explanation.
I would like to correct one factual point for the record. The image was not enhanced or retouched at all. It is a direct photograph of a real person, exported without cosmetic modification. No generative AI was used, and no post-processing (such as smoothing, wrinkle reduction, or similar adjustments) was applied.
I understand that concerns about AI-generated or manipulated images are valid, and I appreciate the scrutiny. However, any assumptions about enhancement in this case are incorrect.
That said, I acknowledge the core issue raised here, which is not the technical nature of the image but its encyclopedic relevance and appropriateness. I accept that self-portraits should not be added to articles unless there is clear consensus that they are illustrative rather than decorative.
I will respect this guidance going forward and will not re-add images where inclusion is disputed.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
I need to address several statements made here, as they go beyond policy guidance and constitute unsubstantiated allegations.
First, the claim that the image is “clearly inorganically composited” is incorrect. No evidence has been provided to support this assertion. The image is a genuine photograph of a real person, and there is no manipulation or compositing involved. Presenting this as a factual conclusion without technical proof is misleading.
Second, labeling the image as “self-promotional” and asserting conflict-of-interest editing requires careful application of policy. Being the subject or author of an image does not automatically make its use promotional, nor does it automatically constitute improper COI editing. Policy requires evidence of promotional intent or biased editing, not assumptions based on identity.
I have already acknowledged the encyclopedic relevance concerns and explicitly stated that I will not re-add images where inclusion is disputed. That commitment remains unchanged.
I am fully willing to follow appropriate processes, including discussion on talk pages and peer review of proposed changes. However, I respectfully ask that future comments avoid presenting speculative or accusatory claims as established facts, as this is neither constructive nor consistent with Wikipedia’s principles of good faith.
I would also note that comparing this photograph to an unrelated image from France is not meaningful. I am Polish, and the photograph was taken in Poland, in a specific local and cultural context. Drawing parallels with images from a different country does not constitute evidence regarding the nature or provenance of this image. Daria Cabaj (talk) 22:38, 6 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
As with the others, passing File:Transgender woman at a pride march.png to any EXIF viewer like https://exiftools.com/ shows a variety of tags like 'Claim_Generator_InfoName=ChatGPT', which are all identical to those output normally by asking ChatGPT to generate an image. I'm incredulous that your camera or other photo editor accidentally inserted this data.
I apologize if my tone is accusatory, but I am moreso baffled trying to grasp an alternate explanation beyond the most obvious. What camera do you use? Do you have any other photos from your visit to the parade? Was writing XY on your hand inspired by July Schultz's photo? –RoxySaunders 🏳️⚧️ (talk • stalk) 02:49, 7 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
I handle all my photos this way because I am not a professional photographer and do not focus on preserving original camera metadata or production-quality workflows.
I routinely store my images in Google Photos for convenience and download them from there for sharing or uploading. Any metadata changes are therefore a by-product of this casual workflow, not an indication of AI image generation.
The EXIF data shows that the resulting image was created via GPT-4o, this is not the result of using Google Photos or any other software aside from OpenAI's. Dishonesty is incompatible with a collaborative environment, continued dishonesty will eventually (or shortly) lead to a block. Stop it. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 04:38, 7 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
Please check the second photo before making accusations.
This is not AI-generated — the photos are real. Any editing was limited to minor cosmetic adjustments (for example, softening a few wrinkles), which is completely normal and common.
Threats and insinuations are inappropriate and unacceptable.
They do not help resolve anything and only escalate the situation.
This image is cryptographically signed as being issued by OpenAI, it is impossible for this to have occurred in any manner other than the use of OpenAI's software, specifically GPT-4o in this case. Any assertions to the contrary, such as the above I routinely store my images in Google Photos for convenience ... Any metadata changes are therefore a by-product of this casual workflow ..., are false.
Earlier you also stated that No generative AI was used, and no post-processing (such as smoothing, wrinkle reduction, or similar adjustments) was applied[1], but just now you've stated that Any editing was limited to minor cosmetic adjustments (for example, softening a few wrinkles). These are incompatible statements, both made by yourself about the same image.
I took a look at the images you uploaded to Commons. Maybe it's just me, but it seems as if File:Daria Cabaj.jpg and File:Daria Cabaj Transgender.png have an identical facial expression at an identical angle with similar or identical lighting despite being in two different environments that (from my amateur photography experience) should result in different lighting and color balance. Is what I just described impossible to happen in two separate photos of the same human subject? No. But it is highly unlikely. - Purplewowies (talk) 04:06, 8 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
Yes, I have additional photos from the same parade.
Like many casual attendees, I took several pictures for personal use, but I do not upload or publish all of them. The uploaded image was simply the one I considered most suitable for sharing. Daria Cabaj (talk) 03:45, 7 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
I was not inspired by Julia Schultz’s photo.
The writing on my hand was done for the event itself.
Not done: That would be an incorrect definition and is not supported by the source you linked. Transsexual people do not necessarily experience severe gender dysphoria or even gender dysphoria at all. Day Creature (talk) 03:12, 20 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.
The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.