Talk:National Association of Women Pharmacists

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Organizations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

Off-topic material

I removed the following material and then it was re-inserted: "She [the secretary] and other members joined the Women’s Coronation Procession, a 40,000-strong march from Westminster to the Albert Hall, on 17 June 1911 in support of votes for women." This statement does not appear to be related to the subject of the article (National Association of Women Pharmacists). The comment on re-inserting it was "Very relevant that the NAWP supported suffragism", but nothing in the source gives any indication that NAWP took any position on this matter - what the secretary did away from the job may be true and it may be interesting, but it is off-topic and looks more like a WP:COATRACK. So in the spirit of WP:BRD I will open the discussion here - how does this level of detail about the Procession relate to the subject? --Gronk Oz (talk) 03:20, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging Rathfelder, who is the other author involved.--Gronk Oz (talk) 12:27, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Pharmaceutical Society (not a terribly radical organisation) starts its biographical note about "Elsie Hooper, a pioneer for female pharmacists in the early 1900s", the first secretary, with this item. They clearly see the NAWP as closely associated with the suffrage movement. They say a group of female pharmacists joined the march - and it seems to be implied that they were organised by Hooper for the association. If you can find evidence that the NAWP had nothing to do with the march then please produce it.Rathfelder (talk) 19:14, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]