Jump to content

Talk:Abortion in Senegal

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: withdrawn by nominator, closed by Launchballer talk 23:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
  • Source: [1] Suh explores how anxieties about the MVA kit's capacity to induce abortion, which is illegal in Senegal, have constrained its integration into routine care. Dubbed the "PAC pioneer of West Africa," Senegal is celebrated for having been among the first countries to decentralize post-abortion care from large urban hospitals to smaller facilities in rural areas.
Moved to mainspace by Vigilantcosmicpenguin (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 9 past nominations.

— Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 16:35, 6 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by BorgQueen talk 13:46, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

( Comment or view )
  • ... that in Africa, the only countries that have passed reproductive health laws without grounds for legal abortion are Senegal and Madagascar?
  • Source: [2] Eleven Sub-Saharan countries have passed reproductive health laws, and nine of them specify grounds for legal abortion (the exceptions are Senegal and Madagascar).
Moved to mainspace by Vigilantcosmicpenguin (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 9 past nominations.

— Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 17:12, 11 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

@Vigilantcosmicpenguin: I'm planning on reviewing this when I'm not falling asleep, however I suspect that any hook saying that they haven't passed a reproductive health law yet could fall foul of WP:DYKDEFINITE as they could theoretically pass one at any minute. I think this should be futureproofed. Also, I'll be looking to run all three in one hook, so I have closed the individual nom.--Launchballer 23:57, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Vigilantcosmicpenguin: Please address the above.--Launchballer 08:21, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I will review these in the morning.--Launchballer 19:06, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies, this took me much longer than I expected. I kept having to step away from this to calm myself down. All three articles are long enough and new enough. All three QPQs done and Earwig checks out. The hook can be found in "Abortion in Africa", except it says "as of 2020", and I think the hook should attribute similarly. I knocked together several short paragraphs per MOS:PARA, however many adjacent sentences begin with "In 20XX", which violates WP:PROSELINE. This should probably be fixed.--Launchballer 20:56, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer: I don't think the hook needs to attribute "As of 2020". The article has to qualify the statement that these are the only countries to do so as of 2020. The currently proposed hook simply says that the countries have done so at some point, which is definite. As for the proseline issues, I will definitely keep that in mind, and I'll get around to rephrasing, but since it's not part of the MOS it shouldn't disqualify a DYK. (And thanks for your edits to the articles. I definitely get the "having to step away from this" part, especially with these doozies of articles.) — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 01:47, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(It's more the subject matter that wound me up than anything else.) I take your point regarding the hook. For what it's worth, I forgot to say that I can't see anything else that might cause this to deserve a maintenance template.--Launchballer 02:35, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer: I have made some changes to address your concerns, especially on Abortion in Africa, which had a lot of "In year X" statements. I have kept the general structure of the articles the same, since I still want to mention when things happened and keep them in chronological order, especially with things like legal proceedings. I think the articles are better now. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 15:23, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Let's roll.--Launchballer 10:10, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback from New Page Review process

[edit]

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: A detailed, well-referenced article that fits well within the series in Category:Abortion by country.

Klbrain (talk) 10:47, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
Passed. jolielover♥talk 05:04, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Abortion in Senegal/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Vigilantcosmicpenguin (talk · contribs) 04:48, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Jolielover (talk · contribs) 10:52, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will review this jolielover♥talk 10:52, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
    a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
    Spot check
  • Reference 1 ([3]) verifies that the criminal code prohibits abortion
  • Reference 3 ([4]) verifies that Sall would consider legalizing abortion in cases of rape and incest
  • Reference 36 ([5]) verifies most providers being in the Dakar region
  • Reference 51 ([6]) verifies the cost of abortion services in 2016
  • Reference 55 ([7]) verifies statement about orphanages
  • Reference 6 ([8]) verifies abortion being opposed due to religion
  • Reference 43 ([9]) verifies law not classifying incest as rape
  • Reference 22 ([10]) verifies The Task Force
  • Reference 34 ([11]) verifies maternal mortality.

Comments: Please provide a specific page number for some statements (I know a page range is stated, but a specific page number helps far more). You can use for this.

  1. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  2. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  3. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  4. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  5. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Amazing article, very well cited. My only feedback is to add specific page numbers for some citations for increased accessibility. Almost at GA status! jolielover♥talk 10:39, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Abortion_in_Senegal&oldid=1273021980"