Talk:Prenatal nutrition

Merger proposal

Moved from Nutrition and pregnancy

I am proposing that we merge (and fix all copyvio) with Maternal nutrition. Out of the two pages, I believe Nutrition and pregnancy has a clearer name, though in my opinion even that should be changed. Please discuss the proposed merger here. The Haz _talk 23:52, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Support merger. I've been tempted to delete Maternal nutrition outright for being a copyvio (and creator asked for comments and then didn't even bother to follow up after I left them). And now we learn it also appears to be a content-fork? If there's anything obviously novel in the other that could be added here, that's fine, but I wouldn't be willing to wait forever for it to happen (tainted well and urgency of avoid licensing problem there vs having no WP:DEADLINE to improve other articles). Likewise, this article here is the proper target based on edit-history. Later it could be renamed to somewhere else (which could be handled later...I don't have any names in mind that I like any better). DMacks (talk) 00:16, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

I've changed the merger template after finding out that there is already a page Prenatal nutrition and birth weight to which both should be merged. The Haz _talk 00:23, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't support that. That one sounds like a specific aspect of this one. Aren't there other effects on prenatal health and development and on the mother's health than just that? That article is only about a year old and seems to have been created specifically to focus on that particular facet of the wider topic. The article here seems to have substantial content on the other areas and that article there seems to have substantial content as well. I think merging them would create an overly-long and unbalanced article. Per Wikipedia:Summary style, in-depth articles on a specific sub-topic can surely stand alone. DMacks (talk) 00:37, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure I have a complete understanding of your point. As it stands, this is what each article covers:

• Prenatal nutrition and birth weight: The article suggests prenatal nutrition guidelines that match up with prenatal weight along with specific problems and causes. Note: there is information in the article about gestation that should be removed (as it's completely redundant with articles on gestation), which I will gladly do during the proposed merge.
• Maternal nutrition: Prenatal nutrition recommendations with minor problems and causes
• Nutrition and pregnancy: Nutrition recommendations before and during pregnancy (aka prenatal nutrition)

Since all three cover virtually the same information and each have a bit of info not in the other articles, I believe they should be merged. However, I strongly believe that after the merge, the name be should be changed to Prenatal nutrition and most birth weight information not directly related to nutrition should be removed. There are a few subsections of information that very much belong in the birth weight article. The Haz _talk 01:10, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

I moved the merger tag to the article page, as this is where they go. I would tend to agree with The Haz's suggestion to merge all three and move to Prenatal nutrition . Most of the other two are "how to pages" with duplicate material (some of it dubious) and probably a lot of close-paraphrasing too. Voceditenore (talk) 10:30, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

I support a merge of all three articles.

I do not support having "birth weight" named in the resulting article's title. Birth weight is only one aspect of pregnancy-related nutrition issues. For example, inadequate or inappropriate nutrition can harm the mother's long-term health even when it has no effect on the baby's weight at birth. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:43, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Just to make it clear, I definitely also support removing birth weight from the title and somewhat from the page. There is already another article on birth weight. However, I will leave any information as to how prenatal nutrition directly affects birth weight. I would also link the appropriate parts of the current birth weight article back to prenatal nutrition. All in all, it will be a big task, but I will have time next week and it would be great to brush up on my embryology. The Haz _talk 02:02, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Clearly these should be merged. Prenatal nutrition seems a reasonable title for the target article, but it matters little, as wp:Redirects are cheap. Lots of spammy and primary sourcing will need to go, the merger seems the best time to do so.LeadSongDog come howl! 21:55, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I am ok with a potential merger but want to point out that maternal nutrition covers both pre and post natal nutrition. There are important implications for both mother and child that might not adequately reflect in just pre-natal nutrition. I believe that the article should therefore be titled "Pre & Post-Natal Nutrition" or there should be separate articles for both pre and post natal (though I am prefer the former option.) Support the removal of "birth weight". Hisham (talk) 09:30, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. Note that the maternal nutrition article does not actually deal with any postnatal nutrition, only prenatal. It's another reason I'm opting for the merger. The Haz _talk 16:03, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

And it should start talking about postnatal nutrition too - but like I said, am ok with a merger. Hisham (talk) 12:05, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

I am sorry for getting back to all your comments so late. I really tried my best to present my article free of copy-vios. I agree for merger of the articles. But according to me the name Maternal Nutrition suggests everything that is required before, during and after pregnancy. The name suggests all. Sorry once again. Swati.suri (talk) 07:30, 30 November 2011 (UTC)