Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to abortion, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Dilation and evacuation article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 365 days |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that an anatomical diagram or diagrams be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Specific illustrations, plots or diagrams can be requested at the
Graphic Lab. For more information, refer to discussion on this page and/or the listing at Wikipedia:Requested images. |
@ VictimOfEntropy "Everyone has access to “affordable abortions” as the majority of pregnancies will be spontaneously aborted naturally, and that’s free." ??? Elizium23 ( talk) 02:28, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
@Elizium, your change to the article made it incoherent, yes. I don’t understand what your purpose in coming to the talk page is.
I’ll expand my comments by pointing out how, again, lack of access to affordable abortions is not an issue that contributes to postponement of abortion care, as there are many cheap but dangerous methods of attempting to induce an abortion that essentially everyone has access to (baseball bat, staircase, etc).
And here’s the rest of my comment, since you apparently missed it somehow: “An abortion procedure is a type of healthcare where an abortion is induced, and it is always objectively better for the woman’s physical health and much less likely to kill her than carrying a pregnancy to term.”
It is an objective fact that abortion care is a different thing from simply the word “abortion” (which could be referring to a spontaneous abortion or an induced abortion done with safe or unsafe methods). Abortion care is a prescribed regimen which is, objectively, healthcare, as it guards the physical health of women and gives them the best chance of survival. VictimOfEntropy ( talk) 02:45, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 October 2023 and 18 November 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): SDlren ( article contribs). Peer reviewers: Tacobellbeanburrito.
— Assignment last updated by Ewingdo 15:21, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
The article is overall adequately complete. It includes relevant information surrounding D&E, its indications, descriptions, risks, alternatives and even the recent laws judicial changes surrounding abortion in the United States. There were no sections of the article that I found distracting or irrelevant to the topic.
Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular
The article appears to be neutral. It does a good job of pointing out the standard management of D&E with relevant sources. It also indicates instances where there is a no consensus or insufficient evidence.
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
The article doesn’t advocate for any certain viewpoints. It does mention the impact of abortion laws on the D&E procedure. However, discussing the varying viewpoints around abortion laws would not be appropriate for this article.
Check the citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
All of the citations are functional. I was able to connect the information included in the article to the citations listed.
Is each fact supported by an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
Each new piece of information is supported by a relevant and appropriate reference. A lot of the information is sourced from American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, a very credible organization. Other information is sourced from reputable journals like Obstetrics and Gynecology. Those journal articles seem to be neutral in viewpoints.
Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added?
A lot of the information originally included in the article was outdated. SDlren did a great a job of adding statistics from 2022-2023. Relevant information surrounding the new abortion laws was also included. A lot of the sources cited were recently published as well.
Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to abortion, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Dilation and evacuation article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 365 days |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that an anatomical diagram or diagrams be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Specific illustrations, plots or diagrams can be requested at the
Graphic Lab. For more information, refer to discussion on this page and/or the listing at Wikipedia:Requested images. |
@ VictimOfEntropy "Everyone has access to “affordable abortions” as the majority of pregnancies will be spontaneously aborted naturally, and that’s free." ??? Elizium23 ( talk) 02:28, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
@Elizium, your change to the article made it incoherent, yes. I don’t understand what your purpose in coming to the talk page is.
I’ll expand my comments by pointing out how, again, lack of access to affordable abortions is not an issue that contributes to postponement of abortion care, as there are many cheap but dangerous methods of attempting to induce an abortion that essentially everyone has access to (baseball bat, staircase, etc).
And here’s the rest of my comment, since you apparently missed it somehow: “An abortion procedure is a type of healthcare where an abortion is induced, and it is always objectively better for the woman’s physical health and much less likely to kill her than carrying a pregnancy to term.”
It is an objective fact that abortion care is a different thing from simply the word “abortion” (which could be referring to a spontaneous abortion or an induced abortion done with safe or unsafe methods). Abortion care is a prescribed regimen which is, objectively, healthcare, as it guards the physical health of women and gives them the best chance of survival. VictimOfEntropy ( talk) 02:45, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 October 2023 and 18 November 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): SDlren ( article contribs). Peer reviewers: Tacobellbeanburrito.
— Assignment last updated by Ewingdo 15:21, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
The article is overall adequately complete. It includes relevant information surrounding D&E, its indications, descriptions, risks, alternatives and even the recent laws judicial changes surrounding abortion in the United States. There were no sections of the article that I found distracting or irrelevant to the topic.
Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular
The article appears to be neutral. It does a good job of pointing out the standard management of D&E with relevant sources. It also indicates instances where there is a no consensus or insufficient evidence.
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
The article doesn’t advocate for any certain viewpoints. It does mention the impact of abortion laws on the D&E procedure. However, discussing the varying viewpoints around abortion laws would not be appropriate for this article.
Check the citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
All of the citations are functional. I was able to connect the information included in the article to the citations listed.
Is each fact supported by an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
Each new piece of information is supported by a relevant and appropriate reference. A lot of the information is sourced from American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, a very credible organization. Other information is sourced from reputable journals like Obstetrics and Gynecology. Those journal articles seem to be neutral in viewpoints.
Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added?
A lot of the information originally included in the article was outdated. SDlren did a great a job of adding statistics from 2022-2023. Relevant information surrounding the new abortion laws was also included. A lot of the sources cited were recently published as well.