Talk:Child abduction scare of 2002

Comment

I realize that this page is still in a larval state, but 21 years later, I am saddened that this has become almost a lost history. Please don't delete just yet.--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 21:40, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

@Bellerophon5685: When I first saw this article I wondered if I should assess it as a list, which it mostly seems to be at the moment. But after reading the three citations about this "scare" it seems there is a different phenomenon at work here, the media reporting of the kidnappings is saturation coverage that keeps people watching the news. I wonder how this should be pitched, as a list article about the kidnappings, or an article about scaremongering media coverage. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 11:44, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

@Cameron Dewe The panic that was whipped up in the summer of 2002 was very real, but other than Elizabeth Smart and the South Park episode, this entire thing has been forgotten. I'm trying to get some more references on it.--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 22:29, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

@Bellerophon5685: Not being an avid watcher of either South Park, or American television programmes generally, and living on the other side of the world, I missed the cultural references entirely. It would make sense to have some explanation about the South Park episode "Child Abduction Is Not Funny" as an American cultural reference in the article, rather than having that as a "See also" link. That South Park made an episode about this topic seems to be a good enough reason to have an article that is informative to readers, as it provide deeper background material to understanding the episode's cultural and historic context. Also, the overarching article about Child abduction has relatively little to say about "Child abduction in the United States", which this article would seem to be an example of how the crime of child abduction is treated by the US news media and law enforcement. Perhaps there is a reason why Wikipedia does not have "Child abduction by country" overview articles, so articles like this one are needed to provide Wikipedia's readers with useful articles. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 23:39, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

@Cameron Dewe Article is still a work in progress, but I think I have better references that the "scare" did happen and it prompted actions from both the legislative and executive branch of govt and has been reported by two scholarly articles and a number of journalistic sources. what do you think?--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 04:52, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

@Bellerophon5685: I appreciate Wikipedia is a work in progress, and the reference you have identified clearly indicate that the "scare" did happen. While this article explains who was kidnapped, it does not explain why the news media reacted in the way it did and went all out to publicize these kidnappings, resulting in the Presidential and Executive reactions. This article needs to join the dots between the kidnappings, media coverage, the public panic and the political reaction. Reading some of the news stories referenced by this article, it seems that by 2002, some child protection advocates and police investigators had become sufficiently "news media aware" to harness the power of news publicity about these cases. This is the "Why?" aspect of the story ought to be told by this article, otherwise the article merely becomes a coatrack for the kidnappings; some of which already have their own articles. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 07:28, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

@Cameron Dewe, KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 I've worked on turning the entry into more of a real article, rather than a collection of news clippings. Have also found scholarly sources on why this scare happened in the context of America's paranoid mindset after 9/11, though perhaps I over emphasized the historical precedents of past scares. What do you think? Can I get it to DYK status soon?--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 21:28, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Improving citations

@Bellerophon5685: I have spent a bit of time replacing manual inline citation with citations that use the standard citation templates produced by the classic editing form interface. For me this is a straight forward form filling exercise, assisted by some basic form filling automation based on the URL. The citation of Finkelhor et al's paper "Nonfamily abducted children: national estimates and characteristics" was available online from the web address http://www.ncjrs.org:80/pdffiles1/ojjdp/196467.pdf, which is now archived by the Wayback Machine as the original URL is no longer valid. The scanned copy available from the Hathi Trust appears to be a poor second in quality to the archived electronic version from the Wayback Machine. A quick Google search shows the official version is now available via the URL https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/library/publications/nonfamily-abducted-children-national-estimates-and-characteristics. While I have cited this as if it were a book, because that is what is currently available in the editing interface as a template form, I wonder if Template:Cite report might be a more suitable citation template to use. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 07:44, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: rejected by reviewer, closed by BorgQueen (talk) 06:40, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that in 2002 the US suffered a "Summer of Child Abductions" even though the number of kidnappings was lower that year than the previous one? Source: Summer kidnapping panic
  • Reviewed:

Created by Bellerophon5685 (talk). Self-nominated at 22:37, 29 August 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Child abduction scare of 2002; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• Unfortunately, I think there are several problems with this nomination. The article was nominated some twelve days after it was created. QPQ has not been done. Moreover, the article most probably needs some major cleanup before it's fit for the main page. In my opinion, it is currently a ponderous and indiscriminate collection of news clippings and quotes related to the "Child abduction scare of 2002"... KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 11:48, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

12 days is just too long to be granted an IAR exemption, but even ignoring that, the nominator has not responded to the above concerns despite activity elsewhere, and has also not provided a QPQ. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:44, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

I don't know what a QPQ is, and I haven't figured out how to get to the nominations page. So its kinda a technical issue, I don't know how to contact anyone or join the discussion about the article. Will try to improve it though.--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 00:30, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

@Bellerophon5685: QPQ is short for quid pro quo or abbreviated as QPQ. It is part of the Did you know/Guidelines. Cameron Dewe (talk) 08:13, 27 September 2023 (UTC)