Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wrongful abortion

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was KEEP. -Splash 21:21, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Wrongful abortion
User added the vfd tag to this article earlier today. I'm just completing the nomination, so no vote. - ulayiti (talk)   (my RfA)  12:48, 3 September 2005 (UTC) Actually, I'll vote keep in light of the debate below. - ulayiti (talk)   (my RfA)  11:57, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: If the term can be referenced with more than just one source I do think its notable. Marskell 13:57, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete a neologism in a single journal article isn't notable. Dunc|&#9786; 14:40, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Neologism unencylopedic and uninformative.--Tznkai 15:16, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. Google indicates this appears to have been the topic of court case in Georgia, US and may have caused a bit of a stir. I'll leave it to legal-eagles and locals to determine whether this was just a media flap in a locality or a case of some significance. If kept, sourced and cleaned, it might be best off with a merge to abortion. -Splash 18:14, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep; a legal term of definite interest and at least some currency. More sources, as always, are better. Sdedeo 21:36, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Reluctant keep. It seems to be a legal term in the state of Texas.  See http://www.tcdla.com/leg/docs/78th_review.pdf - note it's a .pdf file.  Zoe 22:37, September 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, the counterpart to wrongful birth. There have been numerous abortions due to equivocal triple test results that lead to the termination of a healthy foetus. JFW | T@lk  07:49, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Conditional Delete. If it is a legal term, then an entry/re-direct for such a term would indeed be appropiate and welcome. However, as this page is now, it is a highly POV entry, based on one, from what I understand, not very well-known source with an uncommon definition/interpretation of the term. I'll try to go over it later to see if there is something salvagable, but I think that I know too little on the subject and term to produce anything worth keeping. --kissekatt 02:46, September 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. This appears to be a legal term, so this article must be expanded, cited, ect...Voice of All(MTG) 07:20, September 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. This is indeed a legal concept. The mirror image of wrongful birth/wrongful life. There are only few notable academic sources because the legal discussion is relatively new. But it is not merely a neologism. Please do not let laymen determine the worth of professional terms. 132.74.99.84 13:23, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Add some references and links to other articles. This is a Community Portal Wikify article. --Banana04131 18:22, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I've really re-written the article. I think this is a default to keep but we'll need an admin. --Banana04131 20:17, 11 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep I added one reference, but I'm sure there are more Dr.Genius 23:16, 5 September 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.