Talk:Women on Waves

Abortion Low‑importance

	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
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.

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Netherlands

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands articles

Women's History Start‑class Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles 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.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
Start	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Women on Waves appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 19 September 2004. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the feminist group Women on waves built a gynaecology unit on board of a ship and makes abortions on international waters?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2004/September.

Wikipedia

Expand[edit]

I remember hearing about this in the news. It is an appropriate topic for a Wkipedia article. There are no 3rd party sources referenced. There should be some articles in The New York Times, CNN, NewsWeek, TIME Magazine and the like. And there should be some more information about both government and private groups which have opposed this group.DismasMama 05:16, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is no mention of her participation with Joep van Lieshout for the 2001 Venice Biennale. [1]

Sources[edit]

-Phyesalis (talk) 07:08, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

are you still watching this page Phyesalis? Thanks for the link to the Mediamatic installation.AnaSoc (talk) 23:11, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Women on web[edit]

Very strong similarities suggest that Women on Waves and Women on Web are the same organization.Try to find info on the issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4 Women on Web (talk • contribs) 11:25, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Uncritical[edit]

The article looks almost promotional, as if this was a McDonald's boat or something. It is assumed that every thinking person either supports or implicity agrees with the seafaring abortionists. It would be just as shocking if we had Rapists on Wanves or Pedophiles on Waves. ADM (talk) 22:01, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hahaha, wow. Just pathetic. You anti-abortionists must just love women being subjugated at ridiculous extremes if you feel the need to somehow link pro-choice and abortion related things to rape and pedophilia. Run along, the rest of us here in reality understand the issues and don't think up such ridiculous fallacies of arguments against abortion. 203.171.197.37 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2009 (UTC) Sutter Cane[reply]

Wording: "pro-choice" or "pro-abortion"[edit]

I'm looking for opinions from other editors about the wording in the opening sentence. I believe that "pro-choice" is the more common and accepted term, while User:CrossoverManiac prefers "pro-abortion." Rather than getting into a big edit war over this, I'm looking for input from other editors. Joyous! | Talk 03:44, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CrossoverManiac (talk) 04:00, 7 January 2010 (UTC)I'm copy-pasting the following message I gave to Joyous!: Terms like 'pro-life', 'pro-choice', 'anti-choice', 'pro-death' are nothing but 1984-style Newspeak designed to either invoke a feeling of benevolence for one side (pro-choice and pro-life) and invoke negative emotions directed at the other (anti-abortion, anti-life, pro-death). The issue is abortion: sides are either pro-abortion and anti-abortion. There are those who are anti-abortion who are pro-death penalty, so are they pro-life? And there are those who are pro-abortion who are against school choice or people choosing to own firearms, so are they pro-choice? The term anti-abortion and pro-abortion are the most accurate terms that can be used for both sides of the debate. Anything else is focus-group driven buzzwords.[reply]

Whatever your argument, the wikipedia article is entitled pro-choice. If you would like the link to read pro-abortion, then please take it up with wikipedia to change the "pro-choice" article to be renamed "pro-abortion." The goal here is internal consistency with the already established Wiki standards. --Belleiseult (talk) 20:17, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Women on Waves uses the term abortion. The article is about Women on Waves. Therefore the article should use the term abortion. AnaSoc (talk) 23:23, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2018 time to update[edit]

Lots has happened since the last edits on this article. I plan to add material from three peer-reviewed journal articles and maybe some updated news sources. Irish voters decided to legalize abortion in June, 2018, but it's too soon to tell how much influence Women on Waves had on this. I suspect that their influence was huge, as WoW's explicit purpose in traveling to Ireland was to "catalyze" the movement to liberalize abortion laws.^[1] It would be helpful to include this information, if we can find it.AnaSoc (talk) 20:34, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ https://www.womenonwaves.org/en/page/769/ireland-2001

Wiki Education assignment: History of Sexuality[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 September 2023 and 22 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): JoePayne6467, DirectorRosewood (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Valerie and her week of wonders, Robynbest.

For this assignment, we did research into aspects of Women on Waves we feel have been underrepresented on the page, for instance the cultural precedent of overseas gender and sexuality-related work and activism within the Netherlands. We also looked into reception and reviews of "Vessel" as a means of exploring the cultural response to an organization like WoW. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoePayne6467 (talk • contribs) 20:42, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

— Assignment last updated by Aisnotokay (talk) 01:48, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://www.womenonwaves.org/en/page/769/ireland-2001

[1]