Talk:Child laundering

Proposal to Edit This Stub
I am currently a student at Rice University in a course on Poverty, Justice, and Human Capabilities. I am proposing to edit this stub for child laundering, as I feel that it can and should be expanded upon. The page as of now has a general definition, but it does not contain any references to specific instances of this within different countries, nor does it attempt to offer hard numbers to convey the extent of this issue. In my submission to Wikipedia, I plan to offer a comprehensive view of the issue of child laundering, referring to the methods these traffickers use in order to facilitate fraudulent adoptions. I will also address various global scandals in the past several years within regions like China, India, and Cambodia. I seek to include information on global efforts to combat the problem, such as the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption. It is also important to include information on the sanctions that sending and receiving nations have legislated in respect to intercountry adoptions. If anyone viewing this stub can offer any suggestions or advice in regards to editing this page, it would be welcomed, and feel free to contact me via my talk page.

ChloeCBlaskiewicz (talk) 01:39, 10 March 2012 (UTC)ChloeCBlaskiewicz

Just Edited this Stub
I expanded the article greatly, describing the process, hierarchy of people involved, international legislation and measures taken, as well as including three case studies (Guatemala, Cambodia, and China). I'm sure there is still work to be done on this article, so if anyone viewing this has any suggestions, comments, or questions, please let me know!

ChloeCBlaskiewicz (talk) 22:14, 2 April 2012 (UTC)ChloeCBlaskiewicz

Peer Editing
Chloe, I noticed that many of the citations in your references area repeat themselves several times. For example, the same David Smolin reading is listed over a dozen times in the references area, and this in turn causes it to be listed as sources 1-12 rather than just 1. This is due to incorrect citations throughout your body text, and I'll be willing to fix this problem for you. Additionally, your article completely lacks in-text links. I'll be more than happy to include those, too. And lastly, the wording and grammar throughout most of your text could use some revision. Therefore, I'll reword your sentences up through the "child acquisition" section so that they can better meet Wikipedia's standards.

J hernan26 (talk) 02:56, 5 April 2012 (UTC)J hernan26

Alright, my job here is finished. Why don't you be a peer editor for my page, "women in engineering"?

J hernan26 (talk) 00:45, 6 April 2012 (UTC)J hernan26

Updated contribution
Okay......I'm a dufus and apparently I thought that I was supposed to edit your actual page. Needless to say that I was wrong, but that still meant less work for you!

Nevertheless, here were some general suggestions that I did notice while running through your page
 * the body of your page needs restructuring gramatically to fit Wiki standards. Nothing too drastic, but something along the lines of what I did for those few sections
 * Your references and footnotes need fixing as well. The footnotes will automatically be listed in the order you cite the article, and the reference list can just be put in bullet-style format. Again, just follow the generous example I mistakenly provided.
 * In-text links could be increased. I'm just referring to the blue links that will redirect you to another page when clicked upon. You may want to add more on the "see also" section as well.
 * You may want to join other WikiProjects as well. WikiProject adoption is good, but certainly there are others as well. Maybe WikiProject Children? Abuse? Crime/Criminal Activity?

Hopefully these suggestions get the thoughts flowing. I'll update your wikiproject page as well with these same suggestions so that other people in the Wikipedia community can see.

J hernan26 (talk) 06:24, 9 April 2012 (UTC)J hernan26

Possible revisions
My major suggestion to you is to expand your section on "International legislation" as it is the shortest part of your article in terms of length, and there must be more content that you can incorporate into this section. Perhaps you can add a section on the involvement of NGOs with this issue, if you can find enough sources. Also, the subsection title "Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption" seems too long, and could be shortened to "Hague Convention." Also, under your case studies section, you should make it clear that the statistics that you are using are not necessarily showing the number of adoptions done through illegal means as there is no clear way to determine this. In addition, you should link your article to more pages, and make sure you edit those pages to link them back to your article. On a final note, I recommend that you read over your article very carefully to weed out grammatical errors and to make sure the article flows well in an understandable manner, as I noticed some minor issues in this area. For example, in your introduction paragraph, the third sentence has some words that are not separated by spaces. Overall, I find your topic to be highly interesting, and it was an educating experience to read your article. Good luck! Marymorales291 (talk) 06:25, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Article Suggestions
Chloe, your article on Child Laundering is brief enough to not overwhelm the reader, but is at the same time very informative. Great work! I only have a few suggestions. It seems as though the separate section on the hierarchy of child laundering could be condensed and combined into the section on the process of illegal adoptions. The hierarchy does not appear to be important or separate enough to require it's own section, and you even mention the hierarchy again in the first sentence of your "Process of Illegal Adoptions" section in the introduction. Why not just briefly address it then when it is mentioned in that section? Additionally, going along with other suggestions, be very careful that you are using neutral wording. Starting a sentence with words such as "unfortunately" take away from the article's neutrality. Finally, I would just suggest that you proof read for grammatical errors and repetition of words to improve the overall flow of the article. But besides the minor issues I mentioned, you article is very well-written and informative. Hmccann (talk) 20:06, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Response
Thank you all for your contributions. Juan, I know I haven't quite figured out how to do the citations correctly, so I will probably enlist your help. Also, I am planning on going through again and fixing any flow/grammar problems within the article. Haley, I will definitely take combining those sections into account when I am making my final revisions. I am planning on expanding the international section a bit more to talk about "embargoes" that some western nations have placed on international adoptions due to issues in the system. Also I am planning on going through and adding more in-page links, as you suggested Juan. Thanks to everyone for helping to edit my page. It is much appreciated.

ChloeCBlaskiewicz (talk) 02:58, 11 April 2012 (UTC)ChloeCBlaskiewicz

Impact of recent student edits
This article has recently been edited by students as part of their course work for a university course. As part of the quality metrics for the education program, we would like to determine what level of burden is placed on Wikipedia's editors by student coursework.

If you are an editor of this article who spent time correcting edits to it made by the students, please tell us how much time you spent on cleaning up the article. Please note that we are asking you to estimate only the negative effects of the students' work. If the students added good material but you spent time formatting it or making it conform to the manual of style, or copyediting it, then the material added was still a net benefit, and the work you did improved it further. If on the other hand the students added material that had to be removed, or removed good material which you had to replace, please let us know how much time you had to spend making those corrections. This includes time you may have spent posting to the students' talk pages, or to Wikipedia noticeboards, or working with them on IRC, or any other time you spent which was required to fix problems created by the students' edits. Any work you did as a Wikipedia Ambassador for that student's class should not be counted.

Please rate the amount of time spent as follows:
 * 0 -No unproductive work to clean up
 * 1 - A few minutes of work needed
 * 2 - Between a few minutes and half an hour of work needed
 * 3 - Half an hour to an hour of work needed
 * 4 - More than an hour of work needed

Please also add any comments you feel may be helpful. We welcome ratings from multiple editors on the same article. Add your input here. Thanks! -- LiAnna Davis (WMF) (talk) 20:36, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment
This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Rice University supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program&#32;during the 2011 Q3 term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:26, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Crimes against humanity category removal
Crimes against humanity is a specific legal concept. In order to be included in the category, the event (s) must have been prosecuted as a crime against humanity, or at a bare minimum be described as such by most reliable sources. Most of the articles that were formerly in this category did not mention crimes against humanity at all, and the inclusion of the category was purely original research. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:49, 14 February 2024 (UTC)