Talk:Rotherham child sexual exploitation scandal
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rotherham child sexual exploitation scandal article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The contents of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Exploitation in Rotherham page were merged into Rotherham child sexual exploitation scandal on 29 August 2014. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Overloading of "Diversity"
[edit]Regarding the section here,
> The victims were ethnically diverse; with British Asian girls in Rotherham also suffering, despite the myth that the victims were only white.
At this time in the United States, which is a very common source of wikipedia readers, the differing political factions use differing implicit definitions of the term "diversity." While "the victims were of diverse ethnic origins" would work using a pre-2014 implicit definition, in which even a very small number of victims from a second or third ethnic group would be sufficient ('wide' diversity), the position of US progressives, as established in major outlets such as NPR since 2014 [1] is that if a subset (such as tech engineers) does not match the broader population quite closely, this constitutes a lack of diversity ('narrow' diversity).
While the current text would not be confusing to conservative readers due to their typical definition of "diversity," it may be confusing to progressive readers, who might come away with misleading conclusions which reinforce racial, ethnic, and religious bias, such as the myth that it is "impossible" for some racial, ethnic, or religious groups to suffer harms relating to their race, ethnicity, or religion, "because they hold power."
If Rotherham is truly a case of what would qualify, in the United States, as disparate impact, then the text should reflect this so that the article is more culturally accessible to contemporary US progressive readers. If insufficient information about the victims is available to establish 'narrow' diversity according to the standards used by contemporary US progressives, such that it cannot be established whether it would qualify as a case of disparate impact, then the article should be clarified to reflect that. ThomasMakewright (talk) 05:19, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
- There are more than 190 countries in the world, each having their own definition of diversity. There's no need to include every single definition out there to fit a topic from the UK into the political discourse of any other (randomly picked) country. Nakonana (talk) 03:33, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- All evidence points to the majority of perpetrators being of Pakistani background and convictions indicate this. The majority of victims currently are described as white British. Whilst victims from other groups Pakistani and Roma exist there is not much written about these cases, much of it probably not made public. If there is little source material and or things are made public its impossible to add because of lack of references. Truenature12 (talk) 22:03, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
Grammar
[edit]In 2018 Operation Stovewood reported there were 1,510 potential victims, this higher than the Jay Report in 2014.
I think there's a word missing in the above sentence?
Parveen Qureshi, director of the United Multicultural Centre in Rotherham claimed in 2014 'Pakistani community leaders in Rotherham were complicit in hushing up the shocking 'ethnic' dimensions of the sexual exploitation rather than speaking out'. She also stated 'the problem of Asian men abusing white girls was known 'for a long time'.
Why single quotation marks instead of double quotation marks? I'm also counting 7 quotation marks, which means that one is unpaired, but not sure which one. Nakonana (talk) 02:28, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
He was also found guilty of five offences against two separate girls including rape, assault occasioning actual bodily harm and threatening to kill following a nine-day trial at Sheffield Crown Court yesterday.
- "yesterday"? That would be 3 September 2024. Nakonana (talk) 03:12, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Three of the men were found not guilty on all counts, whilst a fourth man failed to appear at court and is believed to have left the country. A warrant was issued for his arrest and he was arrested in November 2023 in Bulgaria and extradited back to the UK.
- "was" believed to have left the country? Maybe?
- Sorry for posting this here instead of fixing things, but I'm not a native English speaker and it's not easy for me to judge what's grammatically correct. Nakonana (talk) 03:20, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Single quotation marks refers to a written quote and double marks refer to a speech or spoken word quoted. Multiple people have written and added to the article so each person will have differences in styles. Truenature12 (talk) 21:57, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
Nazir Ahmed, Baron Ahmed cases - section
[edit]Why is the Ahmed case a section of its own unlike all the other cases? And why are we given biographical info on Ahmed when there was no mention of that type of information on any of the other perpetrators? If those cases are somehow particularly notable, then the current section is not conveying their relevance accordingly. Nakonana (talk) 03:38, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Nazir Ahmed was a member of the House of Lords and a former councillor in Rotherham so he is much higher profile compared to the others convicted so warrants his own section. Truenature12 (talk) 21:55, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- I see, thanks for explaining. This information should probably be added to the article, if it wasn't yet. Nakonana (talk) 02:58, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
"Rotherham grooming survivor awarded £425k after suing rapist" section
[edit]The section should probably be renamed into something more general, like, "Compensation payments". The current heading rather reads like a newspaper heading than that of an encyclopedia. And shortening 425,000 to 425k sounds a bit slangy. Nakonana (talk) 03:49, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Good point the header changed to a more formal version. Truenature12 (talk) 09:56, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
- Though it probably should be more generalized because more victims might sue and receive compensation payments. With the current heading, we'd need to create a separate section for each instance of compensation payment. Nakonana (talk) 18:52, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia articles that use British English
- C-Class Crime-related articles
- Mid-importance Crime-related articles
- C-Class Organized crime articles
- Low-importance Organized crime articles
- Organized crime task force articles
- WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography articles
- C-Class Human rights articles
- Low-importance Human rights articles
- WikiProject Human rights articles
- C-Class law articles
- Low-importance law articles
- WikiProject Law articles
- C-Class Media articles
- Low-importance Media articles
- WikiProject Media articles
- C-Class Sexology and sexuality articles
- Low-importance Sexology and sexuality articles
- WikiProject Sexology and sexuality articles
- C-Class Social work articles
- Low-importance Social work articles
- C-Class Yorkshire articles
- High-importance Yorkshire articles
- WikiProject Yorkshire articles
- C-Class United Kingdom articles
- High-importance United Kingdom articles
- WikiProject United Kingdom articles