Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emergency contraceptive availability by country

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Keep. Michig (talk) 06:58, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Emergency contraceptive availability by country

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

IMO this is list iis of dubious encyclopedicity. Not only it is underreferenced and out of date, I highly doubt it will ever be properly maintained Staszek Lem (talk) 00:45, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 05:53, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 05:53, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. With a rapidly expanding pharma industry, there are a lot more brands that come out in the market. MT Train^Talk 16:08, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for lack of sources and dubious encyclopaedic usefulness. -The Gnome (talk) 18:28, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this article could be easily improved/focused by confining itself to mentioning whether EC is legal and/or available with/without perscription in each country in a table like format. This would make it more easily referenced and updated. Enough data exists that collating would not count as WP:OR [1] [2] [3] [4] SpaceInnovader (talk) 11:15, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also at risk of a bad analogy à la WP:OSE - Compare and contrast the "encyclopedic usefullness" of List of pornography laws by country ... SpaceInnovader (talk) 11:22, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I love the word "encyclopedicity." I'm neither here nor there upon the question of whether this topic has it. Carrite (talk) 15:35, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 10:41, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep the general concept of what countries emergency contraceptives are legal in is surely notable, while a per-country list of the brands for sale in that country would fail WP:NOTDIRECTORY. This is somewhere in the middle, it needs cleanup but I think it can be kept. power~enwiki (π, ν) 19:27, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The legality of emergency contraceptives can be covered in the article Emergency contraception or Abortion law, but a list of brands by country wouldn't be accurate. Here is a list of brands available in the US, and similarly there are multiple brands available in most countries. MT Train^Talk 17:38, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep as per power~enwiki. I accept the point that in its current state it's questionable, however the subject matter of the list, if cleaned up and appropriately sourced, may justify article inclusion. The Emergency contraception article doesn't deal with this on a by-country basis and would become bloated if this content were merged. Thus, i'd say there is potential for improvement so would vote weakly to keep it. Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:20, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:13, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment FYI article has changed significantly. Created proposed table listing availability, counter status, prescrition status, age restriction etc... SpaceInnovader (talk) 10:28, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Changing my vote to keep with the restructured tabulated data showing the legality than brand names. MT Train^Talk 14:47, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This article has important comparative information per country on emergency contraceptive availability. Waddie96 (talk) 16:47, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.