Talk:Child prostitution/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: SlimVirgin (talk · contribs) 19:12, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	The article is nicely written. A few points: There are a few examples of words being quoted without saying whose words they are. For example, "In other cases, 'the children end up funneled into the system by their own families because of extreme poverty.'" This needs a tweak to remove one "often": "often prey on the fact that the children are often unable ..." There are still two cases of this in the first paragraph of the history section. I would have placed the history section at the top if I were writing this (though if you prefer it at the end, that's fine), and for future reference (not for the GA review) it would be good to expand it. One thing that I think should be fixed is to say more about the scandal and where it occurred: "In Europe, the practice "flourished" until the late 1800s,[90] when a scandal caused governments to raise the legal age of consent."[91] Also, some more details of Stead would be interesting, including a link to Eliza Armstrong case. I wouldn't use the word "petite" in "petite 13-year-old girl"; it's enough to give her age. If the scandal in England in the previous paragraph is this one, it's better to leave it out until you discuss it in full, unless you're willing to rewrite the former sentence so that people don't think there were two scandals. Suggested copy edit below.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Footnote 10, dead link Footnote 11: I'm not sure using a back cover as a source is appropriate, especially when they may not be the author's words. Footnote 43: This doesn't appear to be an RS for the two million figure, or for the statement that "Brazil is considered to have the worst levels of child sex trafficking after Thailand." Footnote 45: Not convinced that this is an RS. Footnote 59: This doesn't appear to be an RS. Footnote 60: dead link Footnote 62: dead link Footnote 65: dead link Footnote 66: dead link Footnote 69: Is this an RS? It's not clear what the site is.
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	The first three images are fine. The fourth image, supposedly of a pregnant child, should be removed for now. One of the authors of the book the image comes from, Graham Ovenden, has been convicted of assaulting children. The image caption, including the name of the child, is not showing up under Google snippet view. I'd want to see it authenticated and re-sourced before being used, and even then some thought should be given as to whether it's appropriate. The replacement image is fine.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Looks good to go.

Thank you very much for the review! I think I've addressed everything: gave attributions for the quotes, removed one "often", added more on Stead and a link to the Eliza Armstrong case, removed and/or replaced all links mentioned above, and replaced the last image with one of Stead. --1ST7 (talk) 04:46, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the points so quickly. Here's my suggested copy edit for the history section:

The prostitution of children dates to antiquity. Prepubescent boys were commonly prostituted in brothels in ancient Greece and Rome. According to X, the "most beautiful and highest born Egyptian maidens were forced into prostitution...and they continued as prostitutes until their first menstruation." Chinese and Indian children were commonly sold by their parents into prostitution. Parents in India sometimes dedicated their female children to the Hindu temples, where they became devadasis. Traditionally a high status in society, the role of a devadasi included learning skills such as music and dancing, and taking part in daily service [note: it's not clear what's meant by daily service] to the Hindu deity to which they were assigned (usually the goddess Renuka). The girls, who were "dedicated" before puberty, were also required to prostitute themselves. The practice has since been outlawed but still exists.

In Europe, child prostitution flourished until the late 1800s; minors accounted for 50% of individuals involved in prostitution in Paris. A scandal in 19th-century England caused the government there to raise the age of consent. In July 1885, William Thomas Stead, editor of the Pall Mall Gazette, published "The Maiden Tribute of Modern Babylon," four articles describing an extensive underground sex trafficking ring that reportedly sold children to pedophiles. Stead's reports focused on a 13-year-old girl, Eliza Armstrong, who was sold for £5 (the equivalent of around £500 in 2012), then taken to a midwife to have her virginity verified. The age of consent was raised from 13 to 16 within a week of publication. During this period, the term "white slavery" came to be used throughout Europe and the United States to describe prostituted children.

Note: I can't find the reference to 400 pounds in Whetsell-Mitchell 1995, p. 36, using snippet view; there's a discrepancy between this and the five pounds mentioned in connection with Stead, so I removed the 400. Also, the "number of laws" sentence isn't really supported by the source (Fine and Ellis) that I can see, so I removed it too.

In the Indian section, you write: " ... parents in India sometimes dedicated their female children to the Hindu temples ... the role of a devadasi included the daily service to the Hindu deity to which they were assigned (usually the goddess Renuka) and learning skills such as music and dancing. The girls, who were "dedicated" before puberty, were also required to prostitute themselves." The "also" reads like "oh and by the way ..." Who did they have to prostitute themselves to, for example? Any fleshing out, even a little, would be helpful. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 16:30, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

I've reworded the history section the way you suggested and altered the part about the devadasi system. --1ST7 (talk) 22:19, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

That looks good. I like what you did with the India material. Okay, that's fine in terms of the GA criteria. It's a very nicely written and sourced article and I learned a lot from it, so thank you for the work you put into it. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:15, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you again for the review; I appreciate it! --1ST7 (talk) 05:42, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Someone needs toi check out the Stats on Thailand in this article and compare them with the stats on the Wiki page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_Thailand#Extent_of_prostitution Clearly these are wrong on this page which also means the comment on Brazil's stats are also wrong.46.7.85.68 (talk) 22:21, 28 April 2016 (UTC)