Talk:Tampon

Template:Oldpeerreview I just finished my expansion of this article from a stub , and I'd like opinions. I'm particularly interested in whether or not I managed to maintain NPOV in the section on alternatives, and how the references section looks. The citation styles had me a bit confused. Thalia/Karen 07:05, Dec 14, 2003 (UTC)

I think you've done a fine job with it. Much better than before. Fuzheado 07:09, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Thanks.  :-)

It's excellent. sanitary napkin is a new term to me. Menstrual cycle links to (non existent page) sanitary towel. If they're the same, then I suspect both terms are in currency somewhere (it's the old US/brit/international english trilemma) and this page should say something like "sanitary napkin (also known as a sanitary towel)". -- Finlay McWalter 01:30, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Right. I'm American. Sanitary napkins are what my mom called them during those conversations. I've also heard them called sanitary pads. Not to mention pantyliners (which are a thinner version of the same thing). All the terms prefaced by "sanitary" seem to be coming out of fashion, at least among feminists. I expect that I'm going to write pages on other menstrual products, if no one else does. I'll keep the different terms in mind, and may solicit additional ones, if it seems necessary. Thalia/Karen 04:04, Dec 16, 2003 (UTC)

Also (I hate to be crude, but) I wonder how long it will be before some wag puts in a link to Prince Charles. -- Finlay McWalter 01:30, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Erk. I hadn't thought of that. If somone must, I think the logical place would be in the article about him, linking to this one. But I hope no one does. It's a pity that story was released; I don't think the world is entitled to know about the intimate lives of public figures.

Oh, yes.. thank you.  :-) Thalia/Karen 04:04, Dec 16, 2003 (UTC)

At least half of wikipedia's contributors are either twelve-year-old boys or escaped mental patients. You'd be amazed at the connections folks can come up with... :) -- Finlay McWalter 04:10, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

No, I wouldn't. I remember what boys were like when I was 12. My poor nieces.  :-) Karen 04:18, Dec 16, 2003 (UTC)

Would it be worth it to include mention of the "asbestos in tampons" urban legend (as debunked at Snopes (http://www.snopes2.com/toxins/tampon.htm))? Catherine 00:52, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Why not? :) Dysprosia 00:57, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)

VAT

"In the United Kingdom they are considered luxuries and hence have VAT." In the United Kingdom, almost every product has value-added tax, including most foodstuffs, all clothes for adults etc... Apparently, VAT was introduced as a tax on luxury items, but I don't think it's NPOV to endorse this fiction when daily items such as clothes are considered luxury!

There used to be a similar phenomenon in France. In the early 1980s, cars were still taxed at 33% VAT because when VAT was introduced cars were considered a luxury item. Yet, it would be totally ridiculous to argue that in the 1980s, cars were a luxury in France (almost every household was equipped). It's just that the government went in with that fiction, in order to have a steady cash revenue. David.Monniaux 09:01, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I agree with David here - it is a political fiction that luxury items and only luxury items have VAT in the UK, picking out tampons give a distorted view of the argument - especially as the tax is on all feminine hygiene products (and not boooks for example). -- sannse (talk) 09:18, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

What I don't like about such "tongue in cheek" remarks aimed at criticizing governmental positions is that they may be taken literally. We do not want people who may not know the UK's lifestyle to believe that tampons are a luxury item in the UK, used by a minority of wealthy women. David.Monniaux 10:03, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)