Talk:North Dakota HB 1572: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 12:33, 17 March 2009

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	North Dakota portal This article is supported by WikiProject North Dakota.

Abortion Unassessed

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Abortion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Abortion 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.AbortionWikipedia:WikiProject AbortionTemplate:WikiProject AbortionAbortion articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Politics Unassessed

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

First

Neither source provided has supported the phrasing in the article. The article said This is the first such legislation designed as a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade. The CNBC citation said, quoting the VP of American Life League, "North Dakota -- which has the chance to become the first state to protect the rights of all its citizens from their biological beginning." The article said nothing else that would support the claim in the article. The old citation said "North Dakota Personhood Bill Passes, First in US History" in the title, but didn't discuss "first" anywhere outside of the title. The sentence implies that it is the first legislation designed to challenge Roe v. Wade, which isn't true. With these citations, we could say "This is the first time a bill associated with giving rights to embryos and fetuses has passed." If we had another citation, we may even be able to say "This bill was designed to eventually be a challenge to Roe v. Wade" but I haven't seen any evidence in the citations regarding the design of the bill. But when the two ideas are mixed together, it is worded poorly where multiple inaccurate meanings could be derived. -Andrew c ^[talk] 21:37, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Move

The title is awkward. The title of the bill is "The Personhood of Children Act". 128.146.46.2 (talk) 12:33, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 Neither source provided has supported the phrasing in the article. The article said ''This is the first such legislation designed as a direct challenge to [[Roe v. Wade]]''. The CNBC citation said, quoting the VP of American Life League, "North Dakota -- which has the chance to become the first state to protect the rights of all its citizens from their biological beginning." The article said nothing else that would support the claim in the article. The old citation said "North Dakota Personhood Bill Passes, First in US History" in the title, but didn't discuss "first" anywhere outside of the title. The sentence implies that it is the first legislation designed to challenge Roe v. Wade, which isn't true. With these citations, we could say "This is the first time a bill associated with giving rights to embryos and fetuses has passed." If we had another citation, we may even be able to say "This bill was designed to eventually be a challenge to Roe v. Wade" but I haven't seen any evidence in the citations regarding the design of the bill. But when the two ideas are mixed together, it is worded poorly where multiple inaccurate meanings could be derived. -[[User:Andrew c|Andrew&nbsp;c]]&nbsp;[[User talk:Andrew c|<sup>[talk]</sup>]] 21:37, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
+==Move==
+The title is awkward. The title of the bill is "The Personhood of Children Act". [[Special:Contributions/128.146.46.2|128.146.46.2]] ([[User talk:128.146.46.2|talk]]) 12:33, 17 March 2009 (UTC)