[WikiEN-l] "partial-birth abortion" (was: Major Correction)

Wed Oct 29 17:27:05 UTC 2003

Ed Poor wrote:
>Why not have the [[partial-birth abortion]] article be 
>about the LEGAL aspects? You know, that bill the US 
>Congress passed this month.

Hm. Interesting idea. We could also throw most of the controversy about the 
procedure there. Of course in the first paragraph we would need to refer to 
the actual medical procedure and link to it. 

>The bill creates a legal term for a specific act 
>(which will become illegal if the president signs 
>the bill). The article will then correctly refer to the 
>illegal act.

This makes sense. 

>If I get (or stay?) involved with writing that article, 
>I can link to [[intact dilation and extraction]] (pro-choice) 
>and [[infanticide]] (pro-life or "anti-choice"), too!

Well no article should be 'pro-choice' or 'pro-life', but it does make sense 
to separate subjects from each other on a logical basis after the article 
gets to a certain length. So [[intact dilation and extraction]] could be 
mostly about the medical procedure while [[partial-birth abortion]] can be 
mostly about the controversy/legality/morality of using that procedure (both 
are separate subjects). Both articles will have to briefly summarize the 
other and provide a link. 

There certainly is enough material on both topics to justify two articles and 
the proprosed scheme seems to be a natural way to disambiguate the subjects 
(in any medical context [[intact dilation and extraction]] will be linked to, 
while in any political context [[partial-birth abortion]] will be linked to).  

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav) 