Jump to content

Talk:Abortion: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
NPOV
Agre22 (talk | contribs)
Line 111: Line 111:
This [[Israel]]i site: [[http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1261364536451&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull Rabbis]] tells that Rabbis: Abortion will delay the redemption.[[User:Agre22|Agre22]] ([[User talk:Agre22|talk]]) 14:34, 30 December 2009 (UTC)agre22
This [[Israel]]i site: [[http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1261364536451&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull Rabbis]] tells that Rabbis: Abortion will delay the redemption.[[User:Agre22|Agre22]] ([[User talk:Agre22|talk]]) 14:34, 30 December 2009 (UTC)agre22
:Well, that's one opinion. --<span style="outline:1px dotted #d1bfa4;"><font color="#ffffff">&#124;</font> [[User:Uncle Milty|<font color="#000051">'''Uncle Milty'''</font>]] &#124; [[User talk:Uncle Milty|<font color="#005c00">talk</font>]] <font color="#ffffff">&#124;</font></span> 17:13, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
:Well, that's one opinion. --<span style="outline:1px dotted #d1bfa4;"><font color="#ffffff">&#124;</font> [[User:Uncle Milty|<font color="#000051">'''Uncle Milty'''</font>]] &#124; [[User talk:Uncle Milty|<font color="#005c00">talk</font>]] <font color="#ffffff">&#124;</font></span> 17:13, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

And this other [[Israel]]i site: [[http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1263147878219&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull JP]] also writes the opinion from Chief Rabbinate of [[Israel]] about abortion. In the article, we can read:"There is nothing more important than encouraging births - according to the commentaries - and it is our role to raise the awareness on the subject of abortions," [[Rabbi]] [[Yehudah Deri]], a member of the [[Chief Rabbinical Council]], said during the committee hearing. "Women must be aware - many women don't know that the significance of abortion is murder. The information that we distributed was a rabbinic ruling that abortion is murder, the [[halacha]] sees a fetus as a living person."[[User:Agre22|Agre22]] ([[User talk:Agre22|talk]]) 14:26, 13 January 2010 (UTC)agre22

Revision as of 14:26, 13 January 2010

Former good articleAbortion was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 26, 2006Good article nomineeListed
January 14, 2008Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Template:WP1.0

Archive
Archives
Chronological archives

Topical subpages

Notable precedents in discussion

Tendentious editing

While we were discussing the issue, two of the participants decided jump the gun and start changing articles to ensure that their preferred version was in place. CarolineWH (talk) 16:13, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1. - I don't really think that can be called tendentious editing
2. - While the discussion isn't over yet and I am still trying to get more people to comment on it, it has been 3 days and with 5 editors leaning yes and 1 editor leaning no I think the gun has pretty well sounded. - Schrandit (talk) 16:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have to disagree with you there, on both counts. CarolineWH (talk) 17:10, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Paular, thanks, but this article really is the right spot for the notice. My obvious concern is that, while you are engaged in forming a consensus through discussion, you have prematurely made changes to an abortion-related article that is not central and might therefore be overlooked. CarolineWH (talk) 17:10, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fork changes.

As a courtesy, I'd like to mention that I've made some changes to two forks of this article: pro-choice and pro-life. I'm acknowledging this here so that you can offer appropriate feedback. CarolineWH (talk) 05:21, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The word Death

Sorry to bring up this heated debate once again, But shouldn't we euphemize the word "Death" in the first paragraph to match the article on Miscarriage? This would bring us closer to standardization and a non bias.

BFPIERCE (talk) 04:45, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps we should bring this up on the Miscarriage talk page instead? Death is involved in both procedures. No sense in bringing this article down, for the sake of standardizing a euphemism. -BaronGrackle (talk) 16:35, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed miscarriage seems to have the issue. And to clarify, termination is also a euphemism; and depending on usage it is moreso than death. - RoyBoy 16:49, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"terminating a pregnancy" is not a euphemism, IMO, and is a fairly common term, if not a technical term, found in medical literature. Fetuses are never terminated, but pregnancies are. The miscarriage article, IMO, is fine because miscarriage has a specific definition that is related to viability, where after that point is crossed, the loss is called a stillbirth. I don't believe the word "death" would help clarify what a miscarriage is any further. However, editors in the past at this article felt that because abortion did not necessarily relay on time limits such as viability (i.e. late term abortions), the word death was needed so that readers wouldn't accidentally think abortion resulted in a live-birth (not that that was likely in the first place, but who am I to question past consensus). -Andrew c [talk] 16:53, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, but to focus on the "pregnancy" is euphemistic in nature. Ending a pregnancy is not the hot potato, and to consciously place the "final act" of an abortion in those terms avoids the core issue; and creates a potential for said confusion in the first place. Because "terminating a pregnancy" is technical I preferred it initially, but we came to realize technical terms can be exacting and/or obfuscating. - RoyBoy 03:07, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
@BaronGrackle - Fine with me as long as it doesn't create a bias. Why don't you make the change? BFPIERCE (talk) 11:14, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What change is that, specifically? I see none actually clearly stated. KillerChihuahua?!?Advice 13:06, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Are we discussing making changes on the miscarriage article on a page other than Talk:miscarriage? -Andrew c [talk] 14:49, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I certainly hope that is not what is meant. KillerChihuahua?!?Advice 22:31, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, I'm just discussing in general terms for the abortion "topic"; and clarifying a possible guideline based on my understanding of the consensus. So Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Abortion centric, but that page seems slow. - RoyBoy 22:36, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Abortion in Spain

Abortion is now legal in Spain on request, up to 14th week of pregnancy. Please update the map. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.113.21.164 (talk) 22:47, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As user Severa is retired from Wikipedia, who can update the svg image? - RoyBoy 16:05, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I can give it a shot. First, do we have a source to verify the content? Next, what do you want me to do exactly? Change Spain from brownish to bluish? -Andrew c [talk] 16:16, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently there are more complains on the image's talk page. I have the skills and tools to edit SVG, but I don't have the up-to-date sources on what needs to be fixed. Anyone want to help compile a new list of abortion legality? Or is the Abortion law table current? Perhaps some brave volunteers could go and fact check Abortion law, and once that is up to date, we can fix the graphic?-Andrew c [talk] 16:18, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rabbis: Abortion will delay the redemption

This Israeli site: [Rabbis] tells that Rabbis: Abortion will delay the redemption.Agre22 (talk) 14:34, 30 December 2009 (UTC)agre22[reply]

Well, that's one opinion. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 17:13, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And this other Israeli site: [JP] also writes the opinion from Chief Rabbinate of Israel about abortion. In the article, we can read:"There is nothing more important than encouraging births - according to the commentaries - and it is our role to raise the awareness on the subject of abortions," Rabbi Yehudah Deri, a member of the Chief Rabbinical Council, said during the committee hearing. "Women must be aware - many women don't know that the significance of abortion is murder. The information that we distributed was a rabbinic ruling that abortion is murder, the halacha sees a fetus as a living person."Agre22 (talk) 14:26, 13 January 2010 (UTC)agre22[reply]