Talk:Contraceptive security

Untitled

I am considering editing this article for an academic project. I would like to greatly expand the scope of this article, since there is a lot of information missing. I would like to add sections about the implications (economic, social, human rights, etc.) of contraceptive security (or lack thereof) for women and their families, sections about current movements to strengthen contraceptive security around the world, barriers to implementing policies, and cultural and religious considerations of movements. There would also be many opportunities to link to this article in other parent articles. Potential references for this topic and my edits are listed on my user page. Nicolekoonce (talk) 05:17, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 29 June 2020 and 21 August 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Cvo.UCSF, Vtran1337, Tvu2020, Vmelgarejocovarrubias.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:24, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

I would like to edit this page

Hi! I would like to edit this page to add more information/examples regarding contraceptive security. Please let me know if yoou have any suggestions or concerns. The article introduce the concept of security to people in developing countries who are seeking contraception. The article is really short and needs a lot of expansion. I will add section about different countries’ approach to attain contraceptive security as well as the various factors—economic, religious, social factors at play in providing accessible contraceptive methods to people. Xli1218 (talk) 03:17, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

“Foundations II 2020 Group [X] proposed edits”

As a group project, we want to complete the bibliography of this article as well as expand the information given. Vmelgarejocovarrubias (talk) 20:26, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Foundations II

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 June 2022 and 12 August 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): R.Ea, Pharm.D Candidate, AlannahMoises, Galfarhat, Markgutin (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Snowlan (talk) 16:56, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Foundations II 2022 Group 2 proposed edits

As a group project, we plan on adding more information specifically about contraceptive security in the US, Europe and Africa, as well as understanding the importance of contraceptive security; we will perhaps include resources for obtaining contraceptive education as well as contraception in the US, which could also link to Planned Parenthood's wiki page. We plan to remove any jargon for easier understanding for non-health professionals.

amoises 21:26, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Peer Review by Group 1

Question 1: Do the group’s edits substantially improve the article as described in the Wikipedia peer review “Guiding framework”? Explain.

I believe that the group improved the article to a great extent. The lead section is easy to understand, there are headings and subheadings to support structure of the topic, as well as a balance for each section, and the topic is explained in a neutral tone and supported by numerous credible sources. Aroderos (talk) 16:55, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

The group’s edits substantially improve the article. The lead was not redundant and had weight compared to the rest of the article. The group’s lead provided the definition of contraceptive security and emphasized its role in healthcare and within various communities around the world. Branching off from the lead, the group also had clear sections that went more in depth from the introduction. The group was able to elaborate on the history, importance, and accessibility of contraceptive security. Each section was also balanced, as there were equal amounts of explanation. Various sources were used, therefore providing different points of views to support each section. The edits were also neutral, as the history and development of contraceptive security was outlined without bias. The group was able to reveal each country’s point of view on contraceptive security without emphasizing whether they were for or against contraceptive security. In terms of sources, the information provided was also reliable because various sources such as PubMed were used and their PMIDs were listed. Ucsfrdu (talk) 17:12, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Question 2: Has the group achieved its overall goals for improvement? Explain.

To a great extent, the group achieved overall goals for improvement based on their talk page, as implications of contraceptive security, pillars in place to support contraceptive security, as well as barriers to accessibility were all covered in this article. However, I believe that more current movements should be discussed. Aroderos (talk) 16:55, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

The group achieved its overall goals for improvement because the article is clearly outlined, and each section flows to the other. The definition of contraceptive security was provided, and the different points of views were stated. I also liked how the group was able to support their evidence by using important dates in history. Statistics were also provided to emphasize each point. Ucsfrdu (talk) 17:12, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Question 3: Does the article meet Wikipedia guidelines?

- 3a: Does the draft submission reflect a neutral point of view? Explain.

- 3b: Are the claims included verifiable with cited secondary sources that are freely available? Explain.

- 3c: Are the edits formatted consistent with Wikipedia’s manual of style? Explain.

I believe that the article meets Wikipedia guidelines, as well as edits consistent with its manual of style. A lead section is included, organized in a way that there are headings and subheadings, and references are cited properly. Aroderos (talk) 16:55, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

- 3d: Do the edits reflect language that supports diversity, equity, and inclusion? Explain. Aroderos (talk) 16:17, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

The edits reflect language the supports diversity, equity, and inclusion because in the accessibility section, different points of view on contraceptive security were provided from around the world. Their stance on the topic were also elaborated on based on their beliefs and societal views. By also having a neutral stance throughout the article, there was no bias and all of the varying views on the topic were supported. Ucsfrdu (talk) 17:12, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

1. Group 2’s edits substantially improve the article described in the guiding framework. Their lead section is very clear and easy to understand and it provides a great introduction to the article as it has a lot of definitions and examples of the topic. The structure of this article is evenly dispersed and has great subheadings starting with the history and importance and then moving on to different continents which highlights the barriers of several countries. I feel like this article has pretty balanced coverage, but this could be improved as the authors could include all the continents instead of some of them. The article is worded very neutrally; the authors did not take sides of any party and only presented data and facts. The authors used a plethora of reliable sources and different variety of research articles and organization sites. 2. This group has achieved its overall goals for improvement. The article is of substantial length and the authors utilized a variety of adequate references. Furthermore, the article showcases barriers from various countries and findings were presented in a neutral way. 3a. This draft submission reflects a neutral point of view. The authors did not use any swaying words or talked only about one aspect if one country. This article reviewed the barriers of a variety of countries and has multiple types of references to make the article strong. This article clearly defines the term contraceptive stability, presents it history and importance, and then talks about the barriers in various continents. -Ftran Ftran (talk) 16:56, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

1. The group’s edit provides a clear lead section that provides a detailed overview and description of contraceptive security, its importance, and barriers to accessibility before going into more detail in the remainder of the article. The article also provides a clear structure by providing important sections such as history, importance, and accessibility to further detail contraceptive security. Each section is also well explained, balanced, and contribute to explaining the topic to the reader. The content in the article refers to many studies and findings from the studies, keeping the content very neutral and fact based. There are no indications of persuasion, and the content is neutral. Most of the sources used in the article are pulled from journals and government websites.

2. The group did achieve the overall goals for improvement because the article was very clear, provided factual information to the audience, and stayed very neutral. The different sections of the article were also helpful in detailing the importance of the topic.

3b. The claims that were included were cited and easily accessible for readers by clicking the citation. Each section within the article is well cited and after every mentioned study or statistic, a reliable source was provided. MLy16 (talk) 17:04, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Foundations II Group 2 Reference Review

(a) Each member of group 2 has reviewed the respective references which are all correctly formatted:

• amoises 16:25, 4 August 2022 (UTC) reviewed #1-5, #16-23
• R.Ea, Pharm.D Candidate (talk) 16:33, 4 August 2022 (UTC) reviewed #26-36

Markgutin (talk) 17:09, 4 August 2022 (UTC) reviewed #1-13

(b) Group 2 did not identify any references from predatory publishers

(c) Reference 6 and 7 were duplicates; were consolidated into reference 5

amoises 16:25, 4 August 2022 (UTC)