Talk:Parkinson case

Article is not a biography
Despite the title of this article being a person's name, this article is not a biography of a criminal, but a coatrack article for a crime. The fact the article is not written as a biography is revealed in the first few words of the lead section, which begin: "The Sarah-Jane Parkinson case ... ". This means the article is misnamed and needs to be moved to a better title about the event, because the person named in the title is only notable for this event. I am not challenging the notability of the article itself, only that of the title of the article.

Also the short description of "Australian convicted of false allegations" is both inaccurate and ambiguous as "false allegations" is not an offence in Australian law, although making a false report of a crime is. See ANZSOC group 1569 Also that short description does not explain who was convicted of what crime as the crime that Jones was convicted, and later exonerated of, was a false allegation of Rape while Parkinson was convicted of making a false allegation to police. Additionally, be careful what you say in this article and ensure all your sources are cited and reliable, because this article involves living people.

I think this article should be moved to a different title, but at the moment I am unsure what it should be called. Any suggestions? - Cameron Dewe (talk) 22:29, 21 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you, I puzzled over which it was for a bit. Those changes can of course easily be corrected, and I appreciate you pointing it out. I can do a little more digging later to think of a better title which is consistent with our naming schemes and other pages, but as a preliminary suggestion I suppose there's always "Sarah-Jane Parkinson case", but I'm sure there's something better. ASUKITE  22:34, 21 January 2022 (UTC)


 * I would suggest simply Parkinson case as most criminal legal cases are distinguished by the defendant's surname. There is no need to give the first names and there is currently no article called Parkinson case. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 22:41, 21 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Yes, I agree with Cameron Dewe. "Parkinson case", or maybe "Parkinson rape allegations case" or something like that, would probably be more appropriate, as it's not meant to be a bio on Sarah-Jane Parkinson herself. Parkinson is a common name though, so I could be careful about ambiguity in the title.PetSematary182 (talk) 23:43, 21 January 2022 (UTC)PetSematary182


 * Thanks for your contributions to this discussion. It has helped to clarify my thinking. The title of Parkinson case is a bit of a balance of the article naming criteria between Recognizability, Naturalness, Precision, Conciseness and Consistency as well as considering what the Manual of Style has to say about naming legal cases. In most criminal legal commentaries I have read, it is natural to refer to a case by the defendant's surname at the time the charges were laid, so calling this article the "Parkinson case" allows it to be used naturally in a written sentence. A Google search using the search term "Parkinson case Australia" returns articles about this case, as does "Parkinson false allegations" or "Parkinson rape case". The Google search helpfully suggests adding Sarah and Australia to the search terms, if I omit those words from the search. I don't think the word "rape" should appear in the title, as this implies a non-neutral point of view in the title as the allegations were false, the title is also becomes less concise as more words are added. Other than this criminal case, Parkinson case can refer to Parkinson's disease, but I don't think that causes any confusion for most people. The advantage of using "Parkinson case" is that it is a more neutral description of the case and allows one to add "(Australia)" should the article need more disambiguation in the future, (although this is not the case at present.) It also means that the sort key is the article title and the defendant's surname. – Cameron Dewe (talk) 01:04, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree completely. Thanks for such a thorough response! If nobody else objects, I'll go ahead and move it shortly and make any necessary adjustments. As I see it, the current title can redirect to Parkinson case and likely be tagged as a redirect with possibilities in case anybody wants to write a biographical article (if she's notable, anyways) Nevermind that bit, the instructions state that tag is more for articles where the target is less-detailed, which this really isn't.01:20, 22 January 2022 (UTC) We should also adjust the dab hatnote, probably something to the effect of "about the Australian criminal case", but if anybody has a better idea please do change it. ASUKITE  01:07, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Title of this article
"Parkinson Case" seems rather vague. Shouldn't it be "Sarah-Jane Parkinson Case"? Matza Pizza (talk) 23:38, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Matza Pizza (talk) 23:39, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

First name spelling
I've looked at several Australian sources, and all but one (The Canberra Times) spells her name as "Sarah Jane Parkinson," without a hyphen, so I have edited the article accordingly. Matuko (talk) 01:38, 27 September 2023 (UTC)