Wikipedia

Talk:National Action Plan to Combat Human Trafficking

Latest comment: 6 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified (February 2018)
Learn more about this page

Comments

edit
Latest comment: 10 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

I'm reading through the article and will leave any questions I have here.

  • The second paragraph of the lead says the NAP-CHT was established on schedule, and later says "The NAP-CHT came into force on June 28, 2012." Are these the same thing, or is "coming into force" a separate event?
  • I'm finding the second paragraph of the background section confusing. The chronological sequence seems to be that C-153 passed in February, and the quotes from canadianchristianity.com are dated May, but the order of sentences in the article reverses the chronological order, and makes it seem that C-153 was a consequence of the plans, whereas in fact if I understand the article correctly it was the driving force to develop the plans. In addition, the comment attributed to Coggins that 'such a plan would "make Canada a leader in combatting human trafficking worldwide"' doesn't seem quite right -- he's the journalist reporting that statement, not asserting it.
  • "Smith began developing a proposal in 2008 and continued for several years": the source doesn't say 2008; it says "for the last three years", from a vantage point of September 2010. That could just as well be 2007 as 2008 -- I think it would be better to not give a year.
  • "After her Bill C-268 successfully passed into law as An Act to amend the Criminal Code (minimum sentence for offences involving trafficking of persons under the age of eighteen years) that September": there's no referent for "that September", but the source makes it clear it's 2009. However, I also noticed that the article on the Act itself says it was passed in June 2009, so it might be worth checking which is correct.
  • I think the first para of that section might be profitably merged with the second. How about something like this:
    In 2009, Smith succeeding in passing bill C-268, which established a mandatory minimum sentence for crimes involving human trafficking. The following year, she released "Connecting the Dots", a document she had been working on for three years. "Connecting the Dots" was a proposal "to rescue and restore the victims and prosecute the offenders" of human trafficking; Smith intended it to address both trafficking within Canada and international trafficking into the country. Smith announced ..."
  • 'Benjamin Perrin[15] helped Smith develop "Connecting the Dots"': I don't see this stated in the given source (here); as far as I can see he is simply calling for the same things Smith calls for, and may not have been involved with the development of "Connecting the Dots" at all.

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:33, 13 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

Thank you very much for your comments and interest in this article! I have combined the two sentences about establishment and "coming into force" to demonstrate that these two phrases indicate the same event, restructured the second paragraph of the "Background" section to clarify the chronology, attributed the argument about making Canada a world leader to the early promoters rather than to the journalist, and removed the assertion that Smith started developing the proposal in 2008. I have also combined and reworked the paragraphs at the beginning of the "Development" section, with some variation on your proposed reworking; please let me know if you see a need to rework this section further. An Act to amend the Criminal Code (minimum sentence for offences involving trafficking of persons under the age of eighteen years) was passed after the third reading of Bill C-268 on September 30, 2009 (as indicated both in this article and in the infobox on the article about the Act), but was only enacted on June 29, 2010; let me know if there is some way that I can make this clearer in the article. The Filipino Journal source includes a quotation by Steve Sullivan which states, "I want to commend Joy Smith and Ben Perrin for their leadership in developing a national strategy..." Do you feel that I am misinterpreting this quotation? Thank you again for your recommendations with respect to this article! Neelix (talk) 21:41, 14 April 2014 (UTC)Reply
All struck except one -- can we be sure that Perrin helped with the document, just because he helped with the national strategy? Other than that the fixes all look good. I should get more time on this later tonight and will switch to the GA review for further comments. Interesting article, by the way; I'm enjoying reading it! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:55, 14 April 2014 (UTC)Reply
Fair enough. I have removed the indications in the article that Perrin helped write "Connecting the Dots". I'm glad you're finding the article interesting! Neelix (talk) 14:39, 15 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

edit
Latest comment: 10 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:National Action Plan to Combat Human Trafficking/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 22:16, 14 April 2014 (UTC) I've already left some comments on the article talk page; I'll go ahead and do the GA review, and will leave any further comments here. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:16, 14 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

More comments.

  • Can you say why the picture of police talking to a street person is appropriate for that section? It seems a little too tenuous a connection to me. I think a couple of other pictures are also not strongly enough connected to keep: the RCM one, and the CBSA/Vancouver police one. The article is amply illustrated and I think these could go.
  • "the founder of Walk With Me": it's not clear what this organization is, and the source doesn't clarify. Some Googling quickly made it apparent why it's relevant; I suggest giving a parenthetical description with a source.
  • "Eventually, Smith submitted "Connecting the Dots" to Harper": unless I'm missing it, the source doesn't actually say she submitted it. Obviously she did at some point, but I don't see it here. Whatever source you use, it would be good to pin the date down a bit more precisely than "eventually", if possible.
  • "Perrin said that if the plan was to be effective, it needed to establish a strategy for preventing human trafficking, protecting victims, and prosecuting traffickers": I suggest cutting this sentence. My reading of the sources is that Perrin isn't making a statement about what is needed for the plan to be effective; he's just stating the goals that any plan should have; this is not new information at this point in the article, and I think it can go.
  • "Perrin said that his book, which was published within three weeks of the release of "Connecting the Dots", "shows that while traffickers have a plan, Canada doesn't," and that the victims are the ones who suffer from the lack of such a plan." I think the refs for these are mislaid -- I can see that quote in this source, which you use elsewhere, but not in what's given here; and I'm not sure what the source would be for the second half of the sentence -- I don't see anything that would cover it in the source given.

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:59, 16 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

Thank you very much for having taken on this good article nomination! I have removed the three images you indicated, moved the explanation of Walk With Me to the first mention of that organization, and removed the statement by Perrin that you indicated. I also removed the second portion of the sentence that was improperly cited. In looking for an applicable source for the quotation, I found a Winnipeg Free Press article that contains the quotation and also indicates that Perrin provided Smith with guidance in her writing of "Connecting the Dots", so I have added this information to the article. The Kingston Whig-Standard article states that "Smith drafted her own national action plan on child trafficking and submitted it to the Prime Minister", although it does not mention the date. I don't know of any other sources that mention this transaction, and it may have been the same event as her public release of "Connecting the Dots" in September 2010; in releasing the proposal to the public, she was effectively making it available to the Prime Minister, as he is one member of the public. Would you recommend that the sentence about Smith submitting the document to the Prime Minister simply be removed? Neelix (talk) 18:20, 16 April 2014 (UTC)Reply
I've struck most of the points above. Re removing the sentence about Smith submitting the document: I think it's not high value to the article as it stands, because it doesn't give the reader any real information. You could remove it, but another option would be to leave it in with a footnote along the lines of "Sources do not specify when the proposal was submitted to Harper, but it was no earlier than <month, year> and no later than <month, year>", if you can find support along those lines. For example, any source you find that makes it clear it has been submitted provides a "no later than" date, and similarly a "no earlier than date" might be findable. Up to you; but I wouldn't leave it in unqualified.
I have a bit more time tonight so will try to read further and add any further comments. I'm moving house in a few days so my time is a bit fragmented, I'm afraid, but I will try to find a bit of time every day. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:29, 17 April 2014 (UTC)Reply
I have created a "Notes" section and included the note that you have recommended. No worries about fragmenting the discussion; I am very glad that you are doing such a thorough review. Neelix (talk) 16:19, 17 April 2014 (UTC)Reply
That looks good. You might consider adding citations within the note to the sources you used to get those dates.
I made a couple more tweaks, but found nothing else to concern me, so I've passed this as GA. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:59, 17 April 2014 (UTC)Reply
edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on National Action Plan to Combat Human Trafficking. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 08:19, 13 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:National_Action_Plan_to_Combat_Human_Trafficking&oldid=1208849755"