Talk:Debbie Smith Act

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government.

This article was the subject of an educational assignment supported by WikiProject United States Public Policy and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program.

Hi Watchers!

Hi Fellow Watchers! I am gathering material to edit the Debbie Smith Act page as part of a graduate course participating in the U.S. Public Policy WikiProject. Any suggestions on "must have" sections for the page? Seaver02 (talk) 15:24, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

comments

Tom Morris asked me to comment with respect to NPOV. As I see it, the problems concern both that and emphasis. The article is about the act. It is not about the problem of rape kit backlogs; that would be a separate article. Section 4, "Rape Kit Backlogs still a Problem" is therefore inappropriate--or at least the title is--it might be possible to write a section entitled "Consequences" or Impact-- but if it does, it must try to get information about to what extent the act has succeeded in addressing the problem from a wider range of sources, with a particular try to see if there are any reporting it has done some good in some places. Reading the CBS source relied on--and it seems to be a very good source-- there are two things of significance not included in the summary: one state at least has said the act has helped it solve a number of cases, and a number of states have explained why many kits in their possession are not needed for testing--expiration of the statue of limitations, a person having pled guilt to the charges, a victim unwilling to press charges, insufficient evidence of a crime, or the person being known otherwise. In particular, the detail about Los Angeles may be inappropriate emphasis on its particular problems. Second, the information about the crime that led to the act is too detailed. If there were an article about the victim or the perpetrator under our BLP rules, the detail might be appropriate, but it is not here. DGG ( talk ) 01:51, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, DGG. —Tom Morris (talk) 02:00, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]