Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Feminine wipe


 * 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 keep‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__.  Arbitrarily0  ( talk ) 11:03, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Feminine wipe

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails GNG for having barely any coverage and no sources have been added for 13 years. ( Roundish  ⋆  t ) 01:25, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Products. ( Roundish   ⋆  t ) 01:25, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Feminine hygiene as a proper ATD.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 03:09, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Switch to Keep with Dr_vulpes' sources added.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 13:35, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Should the article be kept, or is merging a preferable option? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:08, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep I've added sources and cleaned up the article a bit. I would be open to merging it with Feminine hygiene as the entry on both is a little lacking.  Dr vulpes  (💬 • 📝) 03:46, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep I think Dr Vulpes's source additions means that this article scrapes by WP:GNG; some more sources that are just about the wipes themselves would be appreciated, but not necessary to save the article. I don't think that it should be merged to Feminine hygiene as that article mainly has links to other articles in the section it is already in. JML1148 (Talk &#124; Contribs) 07:51, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:HEY. Added sources allow the article to meet minimum standards for WP:GNG. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 18:07, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge per WP:PAGEDECIDE - the topic and information in this article appears to need context that is available in the Feminine hygiene article and could be further developed there, in accordance with WP:NPOV policy, so it seems better to include this information (and sources in this article about other feminine hygiene and care products) in the main article, although probably not the press release. Beccaynr (talk) 20:59, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I am honestly open to either but we need some direction. If there is consensus towards merge just let me know and I'll do a deeper dive.  Dr vulpes  (💬 • 📝) 09:23, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I think you have found some strong sources, but sources such as e.g. WaPo discuss "vaginal douches or other feminine washes, wipes, powders and related menstrual products", J Sex Med discusses "feminine wipes, sprays, douches, and yeast creams", and Reprod Health discusses "intimate wash, vaginal douching, use of wipes and deodorants, pubic hair removal." So a merge seems particularly useful for this topic, because these various products and practices are discussed as a group in multiple sources. Beccaynr (talk) 11:38, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah I can see your point of view. It was hard to find academic papers on just feminine wipes. I'm still open to seeing what others think and bring to that table but a merge would make sense to me if more sources come up.  Dr vulpes  (💬 • 📝) 09:56, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Based on sources tending to discuss the products and practices as a group, the further development that could occur in this article seems potentially most helpful in the feminine hygiene article, which has broader encyclopedic content and could also be further developed with the broader-focused independent and reliable sources that have been found during this discussion. There are also:
 * Nan Lin, Ning Ding, Emily Meza-Wilson, et al, "Volatile organic compounds in feminine hygiene products sold in the US market: A survey of products and health risks" Environment International Volume 144, November 2020 ("We collected 79 commercially available FHPs, including washes, tampons, menstrual pads, wipes, sprays, powders and moisturizers, and analyzed their composition [...] Our data suggest that all tested FHPs contained some toxic VOCs, and that risks of using some products should be addressed").
 * A. Jenkins, D. Money & K. C. O’Doherty "Is the vaginal cleansing product industry causing harm to women?" Expert Review of Anti-infective Therapy Volume 19, 2021 - Issue 3 (Editorial) (via WP Library/T&F) ("In the United States, for example, consumers spend over two billion dollars a year on douches, deodorant sprays, washes, personal wipes, and powders [...] There has been accumulating evidence to suggest that many vaginal cleansing products have adverse health effects. [...] more research on these products is urgently needed.")
 * A. L. Jenkins, S. E. Crann, D. M. Money & K. C. O’Doherty "“Clean and Fresh”: Understanding Women’s use of Vaginal Hygiene Products" Sex Roles 78, (2018) ("We explore Canadian women’s use of vaginal hygiene products including feminine washes, douches, sprays, deodorants, wipes, and powders. [...] Potential risks include bacterial vaginosis, pelvic inflammatory disease, and a higher susceptibility to sexually transmitted infections, among others. We believe that companies that advertise these products as beneficial for vaginal health and hygiene can be perceived as not just misinforming women but also profiting from products that are harmful.")
 * There otherwise currently appears to be one study about feminine wipes and one press release, so support for WP:GNG seems a bit weak for a standalone article. Beccaynr (talk) 21:17, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep Per WP:HEY. Nagol0929 (talk) 12:47, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment I can't believe I have to ask this but do we have any women in this discussion? I have not checked everyone in this discussion and there is no need for anyone to self identify if they don't want to. But I felt like this was something I should at least bring up.  Dr vulpes  (💬 • 📝) 08:15, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I think everyone is able to make an assessment of notability and whether or not a merge is appropriate for the encyclopedia, and we should be careful about unintentional implications related to personal characteristics and how this may impact !votes in a discussion. I will say that my hope is for the encyclopedia to be an accessible and educational resource, and I think if someone is directly familiar with women's health care, then the thematic elements in the sources that seem to favor a merge may seem more apparent - but this perspective is also available from the sources, and/or by knowing and working with women, and participants in this discussion are also entitled to disagree. Beccaynr (talk) 13:45, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Per WP:HEY scrapes through WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 23:44, 22 May 2023 (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.