Talk:Abortion in the Gambia

Abortion in the Gambia is currently a Law good article nominee. Nominated by — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) at 10:08, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria and will decide whether or not to list it as a good article. Comments are welcome from any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article. This review will be closed by the first reviewer. To add comments to this review, click discuss review and edit the page.

Short description: none

This article is written in Gambian English and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Africa: Gambia

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa 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.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	The Gambia portal This article is supported by WikiProject Gambia.

Abortion

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Abortion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Abortion 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.AbortionWikipedia:WikiProject AbortionTemplate:WikiProject AbortionAbortion
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Medicine: Reproductive Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Reproductive medicine task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Women's Health

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's Health, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's Health 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.Women's HealthWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HealthTemplate:WikiProject Women's Healthwomen's health
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

A fact from Abortion in the Gambia appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 4 September 2024 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that in the Gambia, there is a belief that people can summon evil spirits to cause abortions?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2024/September. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Abortion in the Gambia.

Wikipedia

Did you know nomination

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 Rjjiii talk 02:26, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that in the Gambia, there is a belief that people can summon evil spirits to cause abortions?

Source: [1] In the Gambia the fear that malevolent people will activate evil spirits in order to cause abortion prevents acknowledgement of early pregnancies.

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Cocoa smuggling

Moved to mainspace by Vigilantcosmicpenguin (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 7 past nominations.

— Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 01:54, 1 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

The article is new enough (July 28), long enough (7,946 characters and 1,252 words, per WP:DYKCHECK), and well-sourced. Hook is interesting. QPQ done. Hook reference is a professional medical journal, but paywalled, so accepted in good faith. Jackdude101 ^talk ^cont 01:37, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

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

Nominator: Vigilantcosmicpenguin (talk · contribs) 10:08, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: IntentionallyDense (talk · contribs) 00:56, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will be reviewing this shortly. I use the GA Table and make most of my comments below the table so it is easier for nominators to respond to my feedback. I usually start with assessing images, stability, and sources then move on from there. I am fine with nominators responding to my feedback as it is given or all at the end. If you have any questions feel free to either ask me here or leave a message on my talk page! IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 00:56, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
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, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	reflist exists. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 05:30, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
	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).	I checked the following sources and found no issues: [2][3][4]
	2c. it contains no original research.	No OR. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs)
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	No plagiarism. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 05:30, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	article is stable. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 05:30, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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.
	7. Overall assessment.

I just wanted to double check, is there no appropriate images for this topic? IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 05:30, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
At first glance, the lead is a bit lacklustre. I'll come back to this after reading the whole article but I recommend reading through Wikipedia:How to create and manage a good lead section. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 05:30, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For criteria 1, 3, and 4 I usually read through the article carefully and provide feedback as I read. This often looks like me suggesting things be reworded, asking for further explanation etc. Oftentimes I will ask questions about the article that come from a place of not being educated on the topic. Sometimes these questions don't have answers or don't result in any changes needing to be made. I ask these questions so I can better understand the topic and thus better provide feedback. Throughout this process, I often make small changes to grammar or punctuation. I try to make these changes by section and if you disagree with any changes I make feel free to revert them! IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 05:30, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]