Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Abortion/Archive 3
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wikipedia Day Awards
Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 18:05, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
Misconduct by Abortionists or Abortion clinics
Where is this topic covered in the Wikiproject Abortion? For example, discussion of abortion clinics or abortionists who fail to follow laws, ethical codes or proper procedures? 84.146.233.113
"By country" categorization
Although it might make sense to retitle Category:Abortion by country to Category:Abortion by region, given the regional subcategories, "...by country" is the naming convention recommended by WP:NCCAT. It also isn't necessary to sort an article into both Category:Abortion by country and one of its subcategories, because, if it's listed in a subcategory of Abortion by country, then it's already listed in Abortion by country. Articles are only listed in two subcategories of Category:Abortion at the same time if two completely different categories apply to the same topic (for example, Richard Starkie in both Category:Abortion in the United Kingdom and Category:Abortion providers, or LifeNews.com in both Category:Pro-life organizations in the United States and Category:Abortion in media). Thanks. -Severa (!!!) 23:21, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Class categories
Is there an established protocol for the kinds of pages which should be sorted into Category:WikiProject Abortion articles? Can images, categories, and templates be included, or are such categories strictly limited to encyclopedia articles (e.g. Abortion, Pro-life, Planned Parenthood, etc.)? If you look at other WikiProjects, some, such as WikiProject Novels, have "articles" categories which include non-article content, while others do not. Also, should non-article class categories (Template, Category, and Non-article) be sorted as subcategories of Category:Abortion articles by quality, or Category:WikiProject Abortion articles? -Severa (!!!) 04:42, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Resignment.
This has been a long time coming, but I'm formally leaving WP:Abortion. There just isn't the slightest morsel of time anymore. Even here, while I'm on break, I'm barely able to scratch out enough time to leave a paragraph-long goodbye message. Thanks to everyone in this project; although I've seen eye-to-eye with exactly no one, I respect all of you, and my fondest and strongest memories of Wikipedia are of working on this project. Perhaps someday I shall return. Good luck to the project. --BCSWowbagger 18:50, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'm very sorry to see you go, but I can completely understand. I very much appreciate having had you onboard for as long as we did, and also everything you've put into this project. Good luck in the future! -Severa (!!!) 23:34, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Manual of Style
Should this WikiProject perhaps have its own Manual of Style, as in the case of Manual of Style (Islam-related articles), Manual of Style (Ireland-related articles), or Manual of Style (medicine-related articles)? We could use our own MoS to formally outline conventions in terminology which already have precedent throughout the project, such as "pro-life"/"pro-choice" over "anti-abortion"/"pro-abortion", and so forth. I'm not really sure if there's a formal process to creating a specialized MoS, but, it seems like a good idea. Let me know what you think. -Severa (!!!) 08:04, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Roe v. Wade FAR
Roe v. Wade is up for Feature Article Review. Please feel free to drop by if you would like to comment. Thank you! -Severa (!!!)
Roe v. Wade has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:33, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Abortion-related violence
Abortion-related violence has a small dispute, and I do not want it to be just between me and the other editor, so I am asking members of this project to review the dispute and comment either way. For the most part, it involves sourcing and what is verifiable, reliable, and notable (i.e. a college newspaper, and lifesite.net).-Andrew c 15:59, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, Andrew. I tried my hand at addressing some of the issues on Abortion-related violence. Also, I created a noticeboard for use in this project a while back, but it's currently not getting much use. Maybe consider posting your input requests there in the future. :-) -Severa (!!!) 10:31, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Infobox proposal
User:Severa approached me re developing an infobox for abortion. Following brief discussion on what this might entail on my talk page, I have now added a draft version to Wikipedia:List of infoboxes/Proposed at Wikipedia:List of infoboxes/Proposed/Infobox Abortion. Discussion on the proposal should be helpd at Wikipedia talk:List of infoboxes/Proposed/Infobox Abortion.
Obvious point is that this applies only to induced abortions (i.e. deliberate terminations) rather than spontaneous abortions (miscarriages) (e.g. complete miscarriage, incomplete miscariage, threatened miscariage David Ruben Talk 03:12, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Terminology of miscarriage vs. abortion procedures
A definition concern was raised by an anonymous poster whose wife had a D&E to complete a miscarriage. Trying to find more information on how the term is defined, I just became more confused. I'm hoping others can provide more insight to the discussion Talk:Dilation and evacuation#A bit of a problem. Lyrl Talk C 16:59, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Methods of abortion
Please see Category talk:Methods of abortion for a new proposed organizational hierarchy. Comments would be appreciated. -Severa (!!!) 19:16, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- This discussion has been going on at way too many pages, IMO. So for those trying to keep up, new proposals have been suggested at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 March 19#Category:Surgical abortion and Category:Medical abortion. Members' imput would be appreciated.-Andrew c 20:29, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Categorization
I've been informed there are "too many articles in general Abortion cat", while I don't think that is remotely the case I could suggest some sub cats. "Abortion in society" or "Abortion debate" category could take 3-4 articles, I'll be bold and do it, moving ABC to that cat as well. But I'd reiterate 17/18 articles in the main cat weren't that many to begin with. - RoyBoy 800 00:22, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Wikiquote
I gather from a brief browse through the Wikiquote Abortion page that it is something of a no man's land. I believe that this page could benefit from a little attention and an even hand. Would anyone be willing to review this page to ensure that the selected quotations are relevant and that it reflects the same standards of notability and neutrality expected here on Wikipedia? -Severa (!!!) 12:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Terminology
I recently placed an RFC regarding terminology regarding the organism/child which develops in the womb. The request does not spring from a particular lack of consensus, but from the desire for discussion regarding the basic need to have a single NPOV term which seems to be lacking. Please take a moment to make your suggestions, the discussion is at the Talk:Abortion_debate.—Red Baron 16:29, 24 April 2007 (UTC)