Talk:Anne Johnson Davis

What does this mean?
I haven't a clue what this is supposed to be saying, it seems that it is saying scholars have provided objective testimonials, anyway it seems like a coatrack. If people want to read about SRA and moral panic they can click through. The references should be about this book not a coatrack for proving or disproving the concept. Ghost stories don't have this type of coatrack warning. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 21:53, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Satanic ritual abuse is considered a moral panic with no objective substantiation except through testimonials by most scholars.

False memory syndrome NPOV
The False memory syndrome section is very POV towards Davis book. The section fails to note the False Memory Syndrome Foundation (FMSF) iatrical is written to disprove her story. The statement listed "We leave it to FMSF Newsletter readers to decide." is semi-sarcastic, semi-rhetorical, and only semi-suggestive. Sure the FMSF wants the reader to "decide" for himself, but the FMSF article is written so the only logical outcome is that the book is false. It's the old "Since there is only one logical conclusion all let you decided" writing ploy.

As the section is written now the section seems to suggest support by the FMS, by only suggesting that the FMS wants people to read the book. The section needs to make clear the FMSF really view this book.--ARTEST4ECHO (talk/contribs) 18:17, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * If you can come up with a better summary, I encourage you to add it. The book has been pretty much ignored except by the FMSF.  They don't outright say "this book is nonsense and doesn't support the existence of SRA", but give it is the FMSF they are certainly going to be critical.  WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 01:17, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Where are the confessions?
It seems to be frequently pointed out that this account stands out from other claims of satanic ritual abuse in that physical evidence exists to corroborate it - namely a signed confession from her parents and a photograph of the victim covered in bruises.

Do these records actually exist anywhere that we can see them? They seem pretty important to the narrative, yet all I can find anywhere is a passing mention wherein they're held up as "evidence" that SRA is real. If they can be found, I think the article would benefit by their inclusion, or at least some specific details as to what exactly was confessed to.

Thalomarre (talk) 23:36, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Anne Johnson Davis. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.deseretnews.com/article/417555/RITUAL-ABUSE-DOES-EXIST-VICTIM-SAYS.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 11:46, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Anne Johnson Davis. 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/20100924055239/http://fmsfonline.org/fmsf09.106.pdf to http://www.fmsfonline.org/fmsf09.106.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:56, 6 July 2017 (UTC)