Talk:Sandra Brown (campaigner)

Untitled

Evening all! If you would like to contribute to this topic, please do! Happy editing! Avril.rennie 22:45, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Dear Immortal Goddezz,

Thank you for your assistance here. I am new to Wikipedia and am still learning the ropes.

Please explain to me why you think this article "reads like an advertisement". It is most certainly not an advertisement, I assure you!

Sandra Brown (campaigner) has led an interesting and unusual life. She has taken what most people would regard as a profound family tragedy and she has used it as a spur to help others.

In writing the Wikipedia article, I am seeking to present the facts as they are. I intend, also, that the article will be a useful source of information for anyone wishing to learn about Sandra Brown's life and how the Moira Anderson Foundation came to be set up in memory of the missing child.

Moira McCall Anderson herself lived all-too-short a life, sadly. But she has come to symbolise abused and missing children everywhere. For this reason, she also deserves a mention on Wikipedia. I have put a sentence or two about her in a section about missing people. (List of people who have disappeared.)

I shall write a short page about Moira McCall Anderson when I have time.

Please note there is a Scottish singer named Moira Anderson who is not in any way related. The names "Moira" and "Anderson" are quite common in Scotland.

I welcome your assistance in getting this article polished up. Thank you!

With kind regards Avril.rennie 00:53, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Please note that if you want to get a hold of me it's easier to reply on my talk page. Anyway the reason why I added the {{advertisement}} tag is because it is not written in a formal tone. Yes it's nicely written but it sounds too 'chatty,' no offense meant. A great example would be right here 'However, there are avenues still to explore and the truth of the matter may yet come to light.' A simple 'the case is still open with interpol' sounds more business-like, or something to that effect. Additionally this has no in article citations which would greatly help with the over all tone of the article. You should be able to get a good idea of what a good article looks like by browsing the featured article list of articles, looking at your welcome message which includes links to help you out, or checking this out. --ImmortalGoddezz 04:21, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Dear ImmortalGoddezz

Thank you for your reply. When I tried previously to find you, deep in the labyrinths of Wikipedia, I came across a message saying that you had taken a wikibreak of indeterminate length. I wasn't sure what that meant. So, I left the message here. It seemed sensible. Even now, I can't see where your talk-page is.

I note what you say about the light - in parts "chatty" - tone of the article I have written about Mrs Brown. As I see it, there are four points to make in this regard.

(1) As an online encyclopedia, Wikipedia is not "cast in stone". Articles go through a process of evolution, getting brushed up over a period of time. There may be several hands involved in the development of an article. I have made a valuable start here, I believe. But I do not pretend to have written the last word on the subject. Not by a long chalk!

(2) I very much hope that the article will be read by a very wide range of people, with varying degrees of education. With luck, the sort of people who might feel daunted by, say, the Encyclopaedia Britannica, will read about Moira Anderson and Sandra Brown in this online form. (All sorts of people have computers nowadays.) My aim is that this article will be accessible to all and sundry. One of the poignant things about the Moira Anderson story is that she was a normal schoolgirl, attending a normal primary school, in a normal Scottish town. All of us who have been brought up in similar Scottish towns and educated in similar Scottish primary schools can relate to her. My intention, therefore, is to present the material in a manner that is straightforward - while being, of course, factually correct. I hope the article will be helpful to people from all walks of life.

(3) Much of the material this article touches on is very sinister indeed. Child abduction. Child sexual abuse. Child murder. And that's just for starters! If you listen to the interview on BBC Radio Four's "Woman's Hour", you will hear Mrs Brown's assessment of what really went on. She believes that the child was abducted by a paedophile ring of which her own (Brown's) father was a leading member. She further believes that, over the years, the missing-person investigations have been suppressed, for reasons we can only guess at. There may be murky depths here, but I do not think it wise to try to write about them. (Newspaper journalists have the expertise of their legal departments to draw on - but I do not!) Thus, the very "chattiness" that you have criticised as a stylistic fault is a convenient way of standing back from material that is highly contentious.

(4) I do know something about the "avenues still to explore" but I was told about them in strict confidence. I do not propose to divulge online things that are strictly confidential. As developments occur, so the article can be updated, and more details published. Mrs Brown is an extremely determined woman, and I do not think the story of the missing child has petered out.

That's about it, really. Because of the nature of the material, I have chosen to be careful rather than "literary". I'm sure that's wise.

With kind regards Avril.rennie 02:13, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Please note that you asked why I placed that tag and I responded. I've never said that the subject matter isn't noteworthy and that this article doesn't touch on the importance of what she does I'm just saying that this can written more formally. You mention that wikipedia goes through evolution and it does, part of that process is tagging articles just like I did this one, tagging articles tells other editors that something needs to be fixed. You mention that you want this to be readable to everybody from all walks of life, when you adhere to the NPOV policy and the Tone policy it is readable to all. When you write it from an NPOV you no long have Weasel words such as "Articulate, confident and passionate in her advocacy.." which are perfectly fine if they're quoted directly from a verifiable and reliable source, but in this case it's not and it ends up sounding like an advertisement for her. I think this would really help you out. Now as for the talk page when you go to somebody's user page (eg. User:ImmortalGoddezz) at the top there should be little tabs saying User Page, Discussion, Edit This Page, History, etc. The talk page for can be found when you click the discussion tab. while on the users page. Just because it has a wikibreak tag (commonly known as taking a break from editing wikipedia) doesn't mean that you can't comment there. Thanks. --ImmortalGoddezz 02:59, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just added archive links to one external link on Sandra Brown (campaigner). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20051209022933/http://news.scotsman.com:80/topics.cfm?tid=684&id=420732005 to http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=684&id=420732005

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know. 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:23, 22 February 2016 (UTC)