Template:Did you know nominations/Abortion in Latvia

The following discussion 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 Allen3 talk 11:59, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Abortion in Latvia

edit

Created by Thine Antique Pen (talk). Self nominated at 20:08, 17 June 2013 (UTC).

  • Long and new enough and mostly well sourced. I have a question about the sentence "However, the USSR did not imprison those who performed illegal abortions." My impression from reading the source, is that there was at least a possibility of prison, but maybe there is something I am missing or have misunderstood. Further, I am not quite comfortable with the hook. The source for it says: "In 2000, alarmed by the declining birth rate, the government has established several programmes to encourage more children.". While it may be common and reasonable to see a link between abortion rate and birth rate, births rates depend on much more than the rate of abortion, so I don't find that the statement is fully backed up by the source. In addition, information from 2000 may be a bit too dated to be writing about in the present tense "are concerned" (although I guess they probably are). Regareds, Iselilja (talk) 15:39, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Removed that sentence as from re-reading the source, I agree that it could be misunderstood.
  • ALT1 that in 1991 there were 34,633 births and 44,886 abortions in Latvia?
  • ALT2 that in 1991 there were 34,633 births and 44,886 abortions in Latvia, but in 2011 there were around 7,000?
  • ALT3 that the 1995 Fertility and Family survey found that 30% of women aged 25 had an abortion in Latvia?
  • Thine Antique Pen (talk) 18:07, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Thank you for responding so swiftly. I am fine with hook ALT1. Hook ALT2 might be more interesting (it's a remarkable drop in abortion numbers), but I think it wil need some copyediting to make clear that it is abortions and not births that have dropped. Also, by reading the source, I didn't actually see any 2011 numbers, only 2010. So my suggestion for the last part of ALT2 would be something like"but in 2010 the number of abortions had dropped to about 7 000." ALT3 might also need an extra had to get the tense right (had had an abortion). I am OK'ing the article with hook ALT1, if you prefer of the two others, just write in a comment and I can change. Regards, Iselilja (talk) 19:04, 18 June 2013 (UTC)