Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Female foeticide in India


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Nomination Withdrawn. (non-admin closure) &mdash;  Yash! (Y) 07:43, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Female foeticide in India

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

(update - *Speedy Keep; legal definition clash) Abortion is not legally considered foeticide in most countries. Moreover, the sources used are unrelated to the topic of abortion. The article that can be kept for the topic is Female infanticide in India. Foeticide and abortion are not the same thing, neither legally nor etymologically, as is widely stated inside the article. --92slim (talk) 02:36, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Withdrawn by nominator. --92slim (talk) 07:28, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Speedy keep - nom is POV pushing. Foeticide/feticide is the act of killing a fetus. Whether or not abortion is legally considered foeticide is not relevant. This topic is highly notable and has been widely covered; India's Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, 1994 made it illegal to disclose a fetus' gender for no other reason except to try to prevent people from having abortions (which are otherwise legal) because scans indicate child is female. Secondly, abortion up to 20 weeks is legal; abortion afterwards is not. I saw a documentary on this topic and they discussed later abortions and women causing themselves to go into premature labor as a way to abort. So even if you want to argue abortion is not illegal, post 20-week abortions are, and would be considered feticide and punishable as such.  —Мандичка YO 😜 00:57, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The issue of "foeticide" is unrelated to sex-selective abortion, thus the legal argument is mentioned for comparison. The legality of abortion in India per se is completely irrelevant. --92slim (talk) 01:15, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree the legality of abortion is completely irrelevant, so I don't know why you brought it up. —Мандичка YO 😜 01:22, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Because it is unrelated to foeticide. Please read the argument carefully. For example, the article starts with "Female foeticide is the act of aborting a foetus because it is female." That is completely wrong, legally speaking. Foeticide and abortion are definitely not the same thing. --92slim (talk) 01:42, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * You mean the argument in which you claimed "Abortion is not legally considered foeticide in most countries" but supplied no documentation/references to support this applies to India, nor any real point? Applause for that argument. If you have an issue with that first sentence then bring it up on the talk page or ask for additional citations. It's not a valid reason to propose deletion of the entire article. —Мандичка YO 😜 01:45, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Feticide is definitely not the same thing as abortion. You should cite a source that claims otherwise, not me; this is both an etymological and legal definition at stake, so the article needs to be rewritten; as such, a deletion is warranted. Furthermore, abortion is legal in India so I don't understand how is that even important. I will repeat it for you: Abortion is not legally considered feticide in most countries. Legally speaking, feticide can only occur if the fetus was viable. Sorry to burst your bubble. --92slim (talk) 02:52, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * OK, just to be super helpful I took six seconds and chnaged it so it does not say abortion in the lede. I'm not sure why you couldn't do that yourself. Naturally you will now withdraw this AfD as that was your concern.  —Мандичка YO 😜 02:57, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * You're missing the point. For example, the article contains sections titled like this: "High sex ratio implies female foeticide" or "High human sex ratio may be natural". This is blatant POV - correlation does not imply causation. Do I have to "correct" the whole article? Come on. It's much easier to rewrite it. --92slim (talk) 03:17, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Did you actually read those sections? Or just the section headers? PS I just changed the section headers! Yay for the edit tab! And these "corrections" were wholly unacceptable as to be disruptive - not only did you completely skew the lede to suit your POV, but you removed large sections of information that broke the references. —Мандичка YO 😜 04:15, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * No, your revert is unnacceptable. I only removed text mentioned 3 times in the lede and fixed the references. I think you don't really know what POV means. Please, keep your attitude in check while discussing articles. --92slim (talk) 04:23, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * If you continue this circus I will take it up at ANI. You've been warned twice on your talk page and on here.  —Мандичка YO 😜 04:29, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * What circus? You're pushing so-called pro-life POV here. --92slim (talk) 04:31, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - please see this related ANI involving nominator's behavior and edits to this article. —Мандичка YO 😜 05:42, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Maybe you discuss the deletion instead of discussing behaviour. --92slim (talk) 05:52, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm the last person who has a "pro-life" POV!!!!!! —Мандичка YO 😜 06:13, 14 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep, nominator hasn't provided a deletion rationale, subject is clearly notable. If there is a content dispute or a proposed rename, the nominator should discuss it on the talk page. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 01:05, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Wrong, you must have selectively ignored what I have wrote. --92slim (talk) 01:15, 14 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment the article should only be kept if there are wikilinks to sex-selective abortion and female infanticide in India in the opening sentence of the lead section - the sex ratios in Indian children are the product of both abortion and foeticide - and the further issue is female infanticide. -- Aronzak (talk) 05:46, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Someone who understands. Abortion and feticide are legally different things. --92slim (talk) 05:51, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I have no problem if those links are in the lede, so long as new definitions are not introduced. —Мандичка YO 😜 06:12, 14 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep. The legal definition of female foeticide is set forth clearly by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, GoI and codified by the Supreme Court of India through various judgements including this. That it may or may not match with "most countries" is irrelevant. The subject is "Female foeticide in India". If there's any problem with specific content or sources, that belongs on the talk page, not at AfD. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  06:02, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  06:13, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Yay ! Thanks for looking those up. —Мандичка YO 😜 06:14, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The definition is not here or here. Can you find other sources? Btw, "most countries" is relevant. --92slim (talk) 06:19, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * At first I thought this was a naive nomination, now I'm beginning to realize it's pointless. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  06:22, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * LOL. That's why there is this ANI, where I've copied/pasted the definition as stated by the Indian government to point it out to nominator.  —Мандичка YO 😜 06:44, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Not really. The US definition of feticide (as explained) is diametrically opposed to the Indian Gov. of Health PDF handbook that you have provided; which, btw, doesn't have a proper search and indexing. Sorry for the misunderstanding; it's rather exhausting to deal with the above user for obvious reasons. --92slim (talk) 06:48, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Dude it's at the top of the second page of text! How could you not find it? And it's not "diametrically opposed" but is the same definition as others besides myself have pointed out. Oh so many lulz in this AfD. Thanks for lettin a sister roll. —Мандичка YO 😜 07:10, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I am no expert in Indian law and didn't notice it. Please refrain from being vindictive from now on, "dude". PD. No, it's not the same definition. But you don't care so it's ok, LOL. --92slim (talk) 07:22, 14 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep - Needed some touchups which "someone" has unfortunately made more difficult by causing disruption, but is clearly relevant for its statistical and cultural relations. It is a shame when a user's (again, no names) POV gets in the way of an important article such as this, that time needs to be spent on this, rather than on expanding the article.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 07:23, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks, go away now. --92slim (talk) 07:28, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Umm, don't think so, you don't tell me what to do. Very disrespectful, no wonder there is an AN/I about you.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 07:31, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Umm, yes I do because this deletion article is obsolete. Bye. --92slim (talk) 07:38, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * You actually did not officially close it, just by commenting you did so. It's ok, any special user such as yourself can make that mistake.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 07:42, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Bye? --92slim (talk) 07:43, 14 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep. This topic has been widely discussed; handily meets WP:GNG. Looks like we have a POV pusher trying to delete it. Binksternet (talk) 07:31, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Not nominated anymore. --92slim (talk) 07:38, 14 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep per Roscelese. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 07:34, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Not nominated anymore. --92slim (talk) 07:38, 14 June 2015 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.