Talk:Postcoital bleeding

Demerge reasoning?

Hi Barbara (WVS), could you explain why this article was separated from Gynecologic_hemorrhage#Postcoital bleeding? Do you plan on expanding this article (maybe to include male postcoital bleeding)? Best, Classicwiki (talk) (ping me please) 19:48, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Classicwiki, Thank you for asking before re-merging or deleting. Yes, I have a substantial number of content and references that I would like to add. This happens to me quite a bit-I begin to work on an article, take a short break, and then return to find that it has disappeared. When I began the article and removed the redirect, I noticed that the redirect was to one sentence in another article that has no references to support the content related to this topic. About content on men-I can add such content if you can help me find references regarding the same condition in men. So far, I can't find such content. Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) ✐  ✉ 20:56, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Barbara (WVS) Great, looks like you are making headway. I would recommend in the future to make a quick note in the page edit history or talk page on future projects - as you are not a new editor I would just AGF. As for the male content (it could also be applied to female), I would think anal postcoital sex bleeding is probably a notable topic, especially when it relates to future transmission risk. I'll swing by later in the week with some journal articles to see if you think it is appropriate for this article. Classicwiki (talk) (ping me please) 22:31, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Classicwiki, before changing my mind, I was going to state the following hours ago: "This redirect (when it was a redirect) has been on my watchlist for years. I see that Barbara (WVS) created a page for it today. My question is: Does this needs its own page instead of continuing to redirect to the Gynecologic hemorrhage#Postcoital bleeding section and being expanded there? Per WP:No page, WP:Spinout and WP:No split, topics do not always need their own article and content should ideally be expanded in the main article first...before being given its own article. And, yes, I am aware that postcoital bleeding is discussed in a lot of sources. Mikael Häggström, since you created this redirect, thoughts? Also, Doc James, thoughts?"

I changed my mind not only because a lot of sources discuss postcoital bleeding and it is probably best for this to have its own Wikipedia article, but also because the Types section at the Gynecologic hemorrhage article is currently very small and the postcoital bleeding content Barbara (WVS) no doubt plans to add will overwhelm that section. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:38, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Agreed, seems like we can reevaluate in a week or two. Classicwiki (talk) (ping me please) 22:32, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Source

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/412468

Barbara (WVS) ✐  ✉ 12:44, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Everything about bleeding after sex

Bleeding after sex 105.112.213.87 (talk) 11:12, 17 September 2024 (UTC)