Talk:Save the Children

Locations: Westport, CT USA

There is an office in Westport, CT USA. I think a bit of information can be obtained on their operations from the website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Twillisjr (talk • contribs) 00:10, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Save the Children Controversies and Scandals

I will try to make this as concise as possible:

I researched controversies and scandals pertaining to Save the Children

Valid sources can be easily found to support the information provided in the article OrangeMike (administrator) assisted in the clarification of the information submitted Information was removed on the basis that 3 pieces of information pertained to their subsidiary (RBreen) Article sections were edited with "subsidiary title in beginning of section"

Removed a 2nd time (RBreen) using the same argument

Question: Should this research be removed from Wikipedia on this basis? The quantity of subsidiaries is significant, USA, SWEDEN, ... , ..., and I thought it should remain where it is. Also, wouldn't a creation of a "Save the Children USA" page require this main page to be renamed to "Save the Children UK?"

-TWillisJr — Preceding unsigned comment added by Twillisjr (talk • contribs) 16:08, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

You need to understand the relationship between these organisations. The Save the Children Fund (commonly known as Save the Children) is a British-based organisation. There are a number of others, which are independent of each other but share a common vision and work together. They are not subsidiaries. SCF UK is the oldest but that is all. The others mostly use the same name - 'Save the Children' or the local language variant of it. They are linked as Save the Children International (formerly the International Save the Children Alliance) which is a separate organisation through which they coordinate their activities. Although they work together they do not always agree - Save the Children USA, for instance, continues to use child sponsorship, a practice which European Save the Children organisations have rejected as inappropriate. Criticism of one is therefore not relevant to any of the others, unless it is a common issue.

There ought to be a covering article for the Save the Children movement - but this really needs to lead on to the individual organisations, because they are separate legal entities. In this case, it is probably best to move most of the text of this article to a separate Save the Children UK article. --Rbreen (talk) 16:50, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

RBreeen, it seems you have a fantastic understanding of this organization. Perhaps the information you have been posting could be cited and added to this page. Then, we can decide how it can branch off. Please let me know if you are interested. I'd prefer to organize it than delete anything (especially information containing valid sources).

Note: I've seen excellent templates for spreadsheets.. it might be a good idea to create a graph if text seems less suitable. Just an idea....

Twillisjr (talk) 22:40, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Twillisjr (talk • contribs) 03:07, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

General

I have change making to make to complete a sentence

I have deleted "the world’s largest independent movement for children" since I believe it to be false. Save the Children seems to be much smaller than Unicef but I guess Unicef isn't considered independent. However on the most recent figures I have available (2004) it seems to be significantly smaller than SOS Children's Villages both in terms of number of countries (130 versus 114) and also turnover (it looks like global turnover is US$771 million in 2004 versus 652m Euros for SOS). --BozMotalk 15:37, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't consider UNICEF independent as it is an arm of the UN. Also, where did you get your figure for SOS - Their website shows their 2004 income as 296,102,000 euros. Quite a bit less that Save the Children's for the same year. Looking at the figures for 2005 and 2006, I think the Save the Children Alliance is far larger than SOS. Omnidewe (talk) 12:17, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Look harder. The figure of 296m Euros is the international transfer figure. Can you find the equivalent figure for STC? There is a further 50m Euros SOS raised in the third world itself and around 350m Euros paying for the operations in the first world looking after children essentially on the part of the state. I approached the CEO of STC about the claim (I've got the email somewhere) and his response was that for 2004 he agreed SOS was higher but that was a snapshot (which is fair: SOS seems to be bigger when the dollar is weak, smaller when dollar is small). Frustratingly though the 2005 and 2006 consolidated figures for SOS don't seem to be published yet. --BozMo talk 13:53, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

The FT Dalberg report earlier this year for total global income at http://media.ft.com/cms/e462102e-2b03-11dc-85f9-000b5df10621,dwp_uuid=c1927432-1f9e-11dc-ac86-000b5df10621.pdf

gives a figure of $807m for SOS and $919m for Save the Children but again unfortunately this compares 2004 for SOS (only figures available, got an email for that too) with 2005 for STC. Its pretty marginal. --BozMo talk 13:59, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

"questions would later be asked as to the long-term effects of such images on the popular consciousness." This statement needs substantiation -- who made this claim? what is the nature of the effects? --babbage 19:15, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair point, it needs to be clarified. I think it would be generally agreed that in the 1990s development agencies became very wary about the use of graphic images of suffering for fundraising, out of regard both for the dignity of those portrayed, and a belief that continued use of such images led to stereotyping. However, it's difficult to find an easily accessible source for this. Here is something that might help: Imaging Famine

Rbreen 22:42, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Predators of 6 years

This is shocking: Save the Children on May, 2008, stated that UN peacekeepers and aid workers in Ivory Coast, southern Sudan and Haiti, were molesting children as young as six. Most victims suffered sexual exploitation and abuse in silence, resulting in unreported and unpunished crimes.news.bbc.co.uk, Peacekeepers 'abusing children' --Florentino floro (talk) 10:54, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Shocking but I am not sure that Save the Children's involvement (as whistle blower mainly) means that it should be in this article. I will leave it for a bit whilst it is topical anyway. --BozMo talk 21:34, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Welcome and please put new comments at page foot:

Hello! I'm a student at Syracuse University, and I will be contributing some information to this page in the coming weeks. Just wanted to introduce myself and let everyone know what kind of information I will be adding. My class is based on TNGOs and thus we are working on Wikipedia articles that address those kinds of organizations. I am relatively new at this, so constructive criticism will be accepted. Thanks! talk —Preceding undated comment added 20:34, 30 March 2011 (UTC).

RBreen: Add Save the Children USA Affiliation

I believe "Save the Children USA" should be linked into this page. Any ideas on where it should be added?

Twillisjr (talk) 03:18, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

RBreen: Pedophile Criticism

10:43, 27 December 2011‎ Rbreen (talk | contribs)‎ (19,310 bytes) (→Controversies and Scandals: how is this relevant, since he just worked at hq? and why is it important that he was a Pakistani national?) (undo)

1. There is no importance that he is a Pakistani national. It is biographical information that was cited and helps to define the individual (as he is not expected to have his own page). Therefore, I considered that fact relevant.

2. It should be obvious that it is a "controversy" when an organization who's purpose is to "deal with children" allows a child rapist to work at their London headquarters. Did you miss the point on that?

24.38.211.121 (talk) 15:22, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Firstly, this section was added by Twillsjr. If you are Twillsjr, please take care to post under that name to avoid giving the impression that there is more than one person taking this view.

Secondly, the nationality of the person is irrelevant to the crime, and likely to be seen as pejorative by Pakistani people. No useful information is involved in referring to it.

Thirdly, news reports have made clear that the man was an accountant, with no access to children, and therefore no child protection checks were made during his recruitment. This is standard practice in UK employment practice. Save the Children have made clear that they were completely unaware of his background, and while it is sad that they ended up employing a paedophile, there does not appear to be any criticism attached to the organisation in connection with this. Do you have any evidence that there has been any controversy about the case? What is your point, exactly? --Rbreen (talk) 18:24, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

I guess the only point is that news sources like the Guardian ran articles on him including the name of the charity so there is a link of sorts according to a third party. But we don't put in every mention of Save the Children in the press into the article and this one looks below the standard required for the article. One might add it is illegal in the UK to make unnecessary criminal record checks (rehabilitation of offenders act I think) so it is pretty hard to find fault in StC's conduct here. --BozMo talk 20:32, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

An idea

This is not my area of expertise, so like probably many others I came here after viewing the video on http://www.motherhood2012.net/ (and reading the State of the World’s Mothers 2012 report) for background information.

In my opinion, since readers are coming from many different countries, it could be better if this became an overview article about Save the Children organizations (it would explain that they are independent legal entities working towards a common goal, the article might also describe or hint at differences in the approach taken by the individual organizations) and then additionally there would be separate articles about

• Save the Children International http://www.savethechildren.net/ the article already exist
• Save the Children Federation (headquartered in the US, since it is the owner of highly visible http://www.savethechildren.org/ )
• The Save the Children Fund (http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/ since it is the original one, and the current article would be an almost ideal after redoing Structure and accountability section since that part seems to me to be about Save the Children International and not The Save the Children Fund)
• any other country organization would be listed in the overview article, and get their own article if/when required/written

As that would be a major change, I am not just doing it, but writing about it here. Absolwent (talk) 00:00, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

P.S. While making cosmetic changes to Save the Children (disambiguation), since Save the Children International was not directly listed there, I noticed that the nice description there would require no adjustment: ⁽any one of several related international non-profit organizations, based in various countries, dedicated to working for children.⁾  :-)

Syrian video

Their recent video has gotten a lot of media attention and almost 20 million views in just a few days. I've started a section on it. Please expand it. There are many reliable sources which discuss it. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 21:37, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Not all 'quoted' comments about Bliar are allowed?

“Following the grotesque award to child-killer @TheBlairDoc Tony Blair by Save the Children all right thinking people should withdraw support.” Despite being taken from Wikipedia link ‘41’, this quote from British MP George Galloway has twice been deleted. Why does Wikipedia continue to block this comment? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.150.54.215 (talk) 11:51, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Well, I've not deleted it, but it's just too much. Polemical commentary, however on target it may be, has no place in an encyclopaedia. Blair is undiluted scum, no doubt about it, but it's not the purpose of this article to megaphone the fact. Cheers! --YeOldeGentleman (talk) 18:46, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Should the article mention the controversy about the high salary of ex-Labour Party insider Justioin Forsyth and the departure of ex Labour Party insider the Blessed Brendan Cox? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.105.181 (talk) 22:38, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Nauru -- Detention Camp -- Abuse Of Refugee Children Was Mostly Ignored

Ex-Aid Worker: Abuse Of Refugee Children On Nauru Was Mostly Ignored

"But Viktoria Vibhakar, a former aid worker for Save The Children Australia, says abuse is a serious problem at the detention camp and has been largely ignored. She was hired to work in Nauru in 2013, and spent a year coming and going to the island.

"One of the first things I got, which was the most striking, was a deed of confidentiality, which was a couple pages and it basically said, you cannot say anything about what goes on in this facility and if you do, you are liable for two years in jail for each disclosure." "

http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2016/08/24/491170178/ex-aid-worker-abuse-of-refugee-children-on-nauru-was-ignored — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.33.229.87 (talk) 20:18, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Merge with Street Kids International

Save the Children has apparently absorbed Street Kids International some time in 2015. IDK whether this automatically merits a merger, but it is beyond my knowledge so my hope is some Wikipedian will do whatever is required in this situation. :^) 173.84.210.56 (talk) 16:37, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Weak oppose to the proposal, on the grounds that it isn't necessary to merge the pages just because the organizations have subsequently merged. It depends on whether or not Street Kids International had independent notability prior to the merge. My feeling from the references is that it did, and given that its focus was different to that of Save the Children my feeling is that it could stay separate. Klbrain (talk) 16:39, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Save the Children USA

This page is about the UK charity, but some - mostly negative - material has been included about the separate Save the Children USA, so I'll be removing it. Nick Cooper (talk) 10:21, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Removed QAnon section

The paragraph on QAnon is not notable enough for inclusion. It is a distraction from the history of a major and important NGO. It is minor and tangential, especially considering that QAnon is a US phenomenon and STC is primarily a UK charity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.232.249.32 (talk) 14:59, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Money took twice this month

Talk about money, taken out my account twice this month which cause insufficient funds bank charge of 30.00 you are only to take out once a month the first of the month very upset on a budget this has 2600:1702:4460:4660:DD9E:FBBF:8490:5B31 (talk) 19:40, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Syracuse University supported by WikiProject United States Public Policy and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2011 Spring term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 15:59, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Policy Analysis - Summer Session24

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 29 June 2024 and 2 August 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Shahmirlodhi (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Shahmirlodhi (talk) 04:18, 27 July 2024 (UTC)