Talk:Barnardo's

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Adoption, fostering, orphan care and displacement (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Adoption, fostering, orphan care and displacement, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Adoption, fostering, orphan care and displacementWikipedia:WikiProject Adoption, fostering, orphan care and displacementTemplate:WikiProject Adoption, fostering, orphan care and displacementAdoption, fostering, orphan care and displacement articles London Start‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles Start This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. England Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The history in this article does not seem to agree in all cases with the history in Thomas John Barnardo. DJ Clayworth 15:32, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Can you expand on that a little, what part do you feel is wrong? --Goldoni 09:36, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Snowmanrecording.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:28, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe someone should add a "maybe you where looking for Barnardo's, the charity" thing to the top of the page for Paul Bernardo - it's only one letter difference, and it's the 2nd google result for a search on "barnardo's" 86.112.65.18 (talk) 11:14, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree this is important. I remember being approached by someone in London (UK) wearing a "Bernardos for the children" shirt fundraising, not that long after the Bernardo trial and being a bit freaked out. It's a really unfortunate coincidence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.1.192.102 (talk) 21:20, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Barnardo's own web-site implies that Barnardo intended to study medicine and that he never did so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.194.200 (talk) 12:10, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
See www.goldonian.org. This says that Barnardo appeared in Court 88 times by 1896. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.194.200 (talk) 12:59, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In the 1960's and 1970's, to avoid the charge of racialism, children were allowed to attend non-Protestant ceremonies, for the first time, at Barnardo's. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.194.200 (talk) 13:18, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Much of the history is sourced to BBC H2G2, which consists of user-submitted content and is therefore not a reliable source. January (talk) 10:57, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a disproportionate amount of criticism in this article, with two sections focusing on criticism. I'm going to cut a bit of criticism and merge both sections, but I think the article needs balancing out with more neutral information; maybe a list of campaigns? 86.136.228.153 (talk) 13:55, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, please don't just remove well-sourced criticism from this page again. If you want to balance it with more favorable information then do so. You cut out the whole section on Barnardo's involvement in Cedars, which is highly relevant and very well documented. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.103.154.146 (talk) 18:48, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It says - 'In all, he was taken to court on 88 occasions, largely on the charge of kidnapping. However, being a charismatic speaker and popular figure, he rode through these scandals unscathed. Other charges brought against him included presenting staged images of children for Barnardo's 'before and after' cards and neglecting basic hygiene for the children under his care.[5]'

No mention of the fact that the vast majority of the charges were falsified. Being a charismatic speaker and a popular figure is not why most charges were dropped.

Bit of balance, please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.69.62.162 (talk) 15:12, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the quotation marks around the "Dr". Barnado was a qualified physician. British doctors use the title Dr. Refdoc (talk) 09:27, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article mentions the origin of Barnardos as children left "orphaned by a diabetes outbreak"-- diabetes is not a communicable disease, so this is a puzzle to me. Source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crocodilian (talk • contribs) 17:44, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken out an edit around child slavery in the intro, as it was not suitable for intro text. Could be included in the main text, but I note prior comments about this article being too critical. I suggest the existing similar sections be condensed into a single criticism section by someone familiar with the content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C4:3D9A:8000:AC95:889F:CFEC:E7D (talk) 20:29, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to remove all criticism from the lede is not going to work -- there is substantial reporting by reliable sources about criticism of the organization covering a variety of very serious issues. Likewise the previous comments about "too critical" are not well thought out, it's fine to provide balance by covering positive reporting, but it's not fine to decide that criticism cannot be included just because there's too much of it. Actually rather the opposite!

It's not normally considered good practice to move everything into "a single criticism section", but some changes to the structure are still possible. MPS1992 (talk) 21:01, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Between 1945 and 1974, Barnardo's supported and participated in schemes that saw around 150,000 children exported to imperial colonies where they were mostly abused, beaten and neglected."

That's interesting considering Barnardos has a database and ship's lists exist that record children being sent in at least the very early 1900's. I have a relative who was on the ship "Colonia" in 10/6/1902 in a "Special Party" all children. They docked in Portland, ME and were transported over the Canadian border. Research it. 2601:8B:4400:6E40:B15A:9046:A391:7BD5 (talk) 04:38, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]