Talk:Invisible Children

The Uganda Today saction

This has no place, imho, in a section concerning a DVD made by US students. It is also out of date. Perhaps it could be moved or merged? --Juliet (talk) 02:52, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

article is dated

it needs to be updated with more current information. for example, they now have several 2007 initiatives involved with Northern Uganda (there is more information on the website). 74.140.222.94 14:28, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

proposed deletion

As the maker of this article I'd like to address its proposed deletion. This page certainly is promotional (although neither I nor anyone I know has anything to do with it. I simply feel that it's a good thing in a world with such suffering) but that doesn't make it uninformative or lacking notoriety. I don't feel that I know how to improve it other than by expanding it. Being about a documentary of this nature this article doesn't really have any source material other than the documentary itself. A Hollywood film might fit into genres or take elements from this story or that one, but this wasn't made up. As for style it seems to fit the typical stub. Again, I don't particularly know how to improve this page, but I don't think that it's something that should be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by af1218 (talk • contribs)

Details of the war should be covered (even if the only source is the documentary). The short text here gives no insight into the event. Possibly, the information could be merged into the article on civil war, if the number of artistic depictions isn't too high already. Pavel Vozenilek 20:55, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

I have no desire to start an argument, and only bring this up because I feel that the cause is important enough to preserve this article. Details of the war do not appropriately fit into this article. The war is important to the film, but Invisible Children is about the effects of the war on the children of Uganda. This article is not about the Ugandan civil war, and other articles provide information on that already. Regarding a merger into another article I would call that appropriate from the limitted information the article currently provides, but this film is noteworthy and so the better thing would be for it to be filled in by myself or someone else. This is true of pretty much all stubs; they contain too little information to be useful articles themselves, but the subject of that article has the potential to be expanded on. - af1218

OK, hopefully someone will add more information. Pavel Vozenilek 21:08, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I've been looking into this project for the last 2 hours, and for what it's worth, I feel it is a more than worthy cause. If there is still a possible deletion of this article, I whole-heartedly vote against the deletion. Those involved in this film are now traveling around the US screening the movie to all those who are willing to watch. Great cause, great organization. Streetsabre 05:54, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Students

This is just my opinion but I think we should leave it and possibly get more information about what was going on when these 3 students went there. That could help the readers get a better understanding of this crisis and add support to this thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Churro Kradd (talk • contribs)

I added the year of 2003 based off the website. By looking at Lord's Resistance Army, you should be able to fit it into the timeline of events, though I admit that more detail on methodology, location, etc would be useful. - BanyanTree 02:14, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if this helps, but you can watch the documentary for free online at http://video.google.com by searching for "invisible children". There is some background information in the film that might be useful. They have since gone back with 20 or so volunteers for additional footage and are planning a main theater release in "a year" (this is their best estimate so far). The three students who started this are Bobby Bailey, Laren Poole, and Ben Keesey, and they should probably be named in the article. I think they know this cause is bigger than them (this is the impression I got from the IC reps I spoke with from their national tour), but quite a lot of people have been inspired to act because of their efforts, and that makes them important enough to be mentioned by name. - DWM 02:18, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

I think that we need to keep this page up because there is no way to stop this problame if we dont educate people. We watched the documetary in school and the imediate responce was to get teh info out there. One person can make such a huge diference and if leaving this page up helps that one person find out about it then this info could be saving lives...-jane —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.7.77.200 (talk) 15:39, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Confusion

We have one film made in 2003, another one in planing to come out in 2006 or so, and also the related NPO (which already has a seperate article), and we need to find a way to distinguish between all of these --T-rex 04:37, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Easy, keep one org page and a single film page, as the primary advocacy tool of the org. Whether that requires turning this article into a disambiguation page or some other rearrangement, I'll leave up to you. I would oppose creating a second film page, as I find the fact that the org and the film have two different pages, given that the article on the film is all about how the org uses it, questionable. If anything, the articles should be merged. - BanyanTree 17:48, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Agreed that we should go with a film and organization page. I don't think we need a disambiguation page; in my opinion, the little phrase at the top is sufficient. The content of the two pages may be similar now, but I think the hope is that it will all be expanded. The organization page was only created a day or two ago. As for the two films, I think they should fit nicely together because I think the first film is just a rough draft of sorts. It would deserve its own section, and the new, full-length film would become the primary film of the article. --Basar 18:28, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Please remove the perspective that the film-makers "discovered" this phenomenon. That is a very ignorant comment. Clearly, Ugandans and those interested in human rights violations knew about this before the film-makers. Also, reference "Trial Justice" - by Tim Allen - to lead to sources that document actual figures concerning child soldiers. It has been shown that child soldiers is largely a terror technique - numbers citing 90% of the army are children are supported only by public opinion in the surrounding region. This terror in the public opinion is exactly what the LRA desires [I'm not saying they didnt target children or that night children didnt exist]. In reality, the majority of LRA abductions target adults for short periods of time to provide food, aid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.59.99.238 (talk) 06:33, 17 March 2007

IMDB

Why isn't this on IMDB.com? That site has everything, and this is certainly more notable than a lot of the entries they have on there. --Basar 01:49, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure, but this is Wikipedia, not IMDB. Stop the War in Uganda! 04:29, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

peace talks

I think it is equally ignorant to suggest that peace talks were a result of this film. There have been several attempted peace talks throughout the duration of this war. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.141.179.33 (talk) 04:55, 4 May 2007 (UTC).

praise for invisible children

^{i would like to say that this topic is very important to me and a group of over 200 people in new zealand. the video brings up important issues that must be resolved.Nitronik 21:29, 6 May 2007 (UTC)}

Where can you get it?

It's not on netflix! any ideas?

Fair use rationale for Image:Invisible Children DVD.jpg

Image:Invisible Children DVD.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

History of the war in Uganda and Uganda today sections of the article

These sections are not really appropriate for an article about a film. I suggest that they be removed and replaced with a paragraph or two that provide a little context for the film and link to more appropriate articles about the situation in Uganda. Strobilus (talk) 16:45, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Titles

Shouldn't Invisible Children redirect to Invisible Children Inc. (the main organization) and not a single film made by the organization? --Shruti14 ^{talk • sign} 02:18, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

This seems like a good idea, especially with the influx of Kony 2012 traffic (http://stats.grok.se/en/latest90/Invisible_Children), most people have never heard of Invisible Children the film. Going to add a link at the top of page to Invisible Children Inc (Jonathanfu (talk) 06:42, 9 March 2012 (UTC))

kathy

saben soy una chica de COSTA RICA pero intento estar atenta sobre las cosas que suceden en AFRICA, saber que los ninos son explotados, esclavisados me pone tristre. Cuando tenga mas edad espero conocer AFRICA y adoptar algunos ninos, talvez suene tonto pero espero en DIOS que las personas de ese gobierno recapaciten y vean el daño que le hacen a esta nacion. ES HORA DE ACABAR LAS GUERRAS Y DAR PAZ A ESTE PAIS. ATTE: kathy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.199.248.66 (talk) 20:07, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Deleted ref flag

Every paragraph has refs so I deleted the ref flag. I would suggest that someone further wikify. I linked to Lord's Resistance Army but someone more knowledgeable should add more links as this contextualization would respond to several of the comments and concerns above. I left the general cleanup tag --YakbutterT (talk) 20:39, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Similar article

Hi all, while on recent change patrol, I moved a poorly named article to Invisible Children Inc. It seems to have substantial overlap with this article so I thought I would make you all aware of this so that you can see if it's worth merging/linking to or alternately just deleting as a CSD A10 (recently created article that duplicates an existing topic). The other article is about the non-profit org, rather than the movie. Sailsbystars (talk) 05:06, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Private Agenda

the first paragraph seems to have been edited by someone with an agenda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by U91731 (talk • contribs) 18:22, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Controversy

Think a Controversy section is needed discussing the Invisible Children. Joseph Kony 2012: growing outrage in Uganda over film

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/uganda/9131469/Joseph-Kony-2012-growing-outrage-in-Uganda-over-film.html

"The organization behind Kony 2012 — Invisible Children Inc. — is an extremely shady nonprofit that has been called ”misleading,” “naive,” and “dangerous” by a Yale political science professor, and has been accused by Foreign Affairs of “manipulat[ing] facts for strategic purposes.” They have also been criticized by the Better Business Bureau for refusing to provide information necessary to determine if IC meets the Bureau’s standards."

"Additionally, IC has a low two-star rating in accountability from Charity Navigator because they won’t let their financials be independently audited. That’s not a good thing. In fact, it’s a very bad thing, and should make you immediately pause and reflect on where the money you’re sending them is going.'

http://thedailywh.at/2012/03/07/on-kony-2012-2/

Their total expenses for 2011 were $8,894,632 and of that, $2,810,681 were spent on direct services.

That is 6,083,951 of what was given to them not going to direct help.

Where there are many, many other charities that have much higher proportion.

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=12429

2 stars in Accountability and Transparency. Why won't they allow outside audits?

To me that is worrying also.

I'm sure they do some good. But they could be doing a lot more I suspect.

Even the BBC has picked up on this: "However, Invisible Children was accused of spending most of its raised funds on salaries, travel expenses and film-making."

"Bloggers also pointed out that NGO watchdog Charity Navigator had given the group only two out of four stars for financial accountability."

"And an article in Foreign Affairs which accused Invisible Children and other non-profits of having "manipulated facts for strategic purposes" was circulated on the web."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-17295078

 http://projectdiaspora.org/2012/03/08/respect-my-agency-2012/

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/08/jacob-acaye-child-kony-2012?intcmp=122

Or one of the founders being arrested recently.

here is the foreign affairs article: http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/136673/mareike-schomerus-tim-allen-and-koen-vlassenroot/obama-takes-on-the-lra?page=show 128.100.3.67 (talk) 05:15, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Invisible Children. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071004230711/http://www.invisiblechildren.com/home.php to http://www.invisiblechildren.com/home.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:24, 16 November 2017 (UTC)