Talk:United Kingdom football sexual abuse scandal/Archive 1

Archive 1

No longer just English football sexual abuse scandal

Revelations of child sexual abuse at a football club in Scotland makes me wonder if the title of the article should be changed, perhaps to British or UK football sexual abuse scandal. Welcome other editors' views. Paul W (talk) 21:50, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

This has moved into both Scotland and Northern Ireland so no longer just young English footballers. Title needs changing. Would favour British Football.--Egghead06 (talk) 14:45, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

The McCafferty allegations in Northern Ireland expand this beyond Great Britain to Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Would UK be a better opening word for the title? Paul W (talk) 21:50, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Since GB doesn't include NI, it'd need to be United Kingdom. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:54, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

'Homosexual'

Can someone explain why the word "homosexual" doesn't appear on this page at all? A person searching for keyword string homosexual+abuse might want to find this page. Maybe the title should be UK football homosexual abuse scandal?Martindo (talk) 23:34, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Generally adults who sexually abuse children of the same sex as themselves do not show the same inclinations in any sexual relationships they may have as adults to any statistically significant degree, and conversely adults who prefer same-sex relationships do not show any greater predilection toward sexually abusing children than heterosexuals. This article is about pedophiles, not homosexuals. Conflating the two is generally considered POV. Daniel Case (talk) 06:00, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Of course that is true *within* the article, because the context is clear if the article is considered in complete isolation. But what about people searching from outside WP?Martindo (talk) 09:36, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Pederasty is the world you're looking for, no? 95.169.215.250 (talk) 20:53, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

It should be stated in the lead that all the perpetrators and victims were male. 90.254.27.44 (talk) 23:42, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Not really when 2% of those reporting abuse were female [1]. Keresaspa (talk) 03:12, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Wales

Aren't the Welsh police investigating too? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.84.247.119 (talk) 13:42, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

North Wales Police reported to be investigating (added them to article); not sure about other forces in south Wales. Paul W (talk) 09:23, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Alleged abusers?

Barry Bennell has been convicted of child sexual abuse, and therefore cannot be described as an "alleged abuser" since the accusations have been proven in court. The article needs reorganising to take account of the latest development. Hzh (talk) 09:49, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

I have changed the section heading to "Implicated individuals" to address this point. Paul W (talk) 11:18, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Proposal: Separate article on Bennell

This article surpasses 100 kB despite not having any images, tables or other material that boosts that number.

Although there are not separate articles on several more notorious criminals such as Ian Brady, in that case the perpetrators and the crime have a near 100% overlap. This article is about the November 2016 whistleblowing and subsequent scandal involving figures at different times and in different parts of the country who AFAIK have not been found by any court of law to be in conspiracy with each other.

Bennell was a marginally known figure to the public before this scandal, but had been featured in the Dispatches documentary after his US conviction and had been mentioned and contacted by the media in 2012 during the inquiry into the death of Gary Speed. So there is material here which is independent of the 2016 revelations.

There has been significant discussion by media and authorities in news articles, videos and documentaries about Bennell's crimes, his personality and his criminal modus operandi.

While I know WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, there are separate articles on Larry Nassar and the USA Gymnastics sex abuse scandal, which is almost exclusively about his offences. This article however concerns several serial offenders or alleged serial offenders who have not been proven to have been conspiring. Harambe Walks (talk) 20:00, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Am swayed to support this move - partly, as Harambe Walks says, because Bennell has some previous notoriety before the scandal erupted in late 2016. But am also wondering, if the same logic applied, if a separate article might then be needed for Ormond? Paul W (talk) 15:42, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

• Support splits @Paul W: I wouldn't be opposed to a split for Ormond. I also think that those articles should be titled to indicate that the articles are primarily about the alleged abuse and the subsequent scandals. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  22:14, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Higgins also dates back to the Dispatches documentary, and while he has, to date, only been convicted of one offence and faces a retrial on 48 others, he could fall into the same group as Bennell and Ormond. Is it appropriate to spin off three articles about three criminals mainly because they were implicated in the ongoing scandal? Paul W (talk) 08:00, 23 August 2018 (UTC)