This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Medleya. Peer reviewers: Patriqueliu, Slklose.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 07:49, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Anr5404.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 07:49, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Dcheim, Ballstatesoccer40, MrsJWalda, Jazzminn1010, Coffeecat1. Peer reviewers: Amborder.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 07:49, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Unless someone has a citation, I'm not so sure that a shovel is commonly used in a forensic/medical exam related to rape. I am going to remove it for now, but will gladly put it back if someone has a reference. Life Now ( talk) 20:31, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
CBS news did a story on how most rape kits aren't tested, because of the cost. [1] Terrifying and outrageous. Should that be in this article? Or would it make victims who look up information about it, less likely to report? They even make the victims pay for it in some areas. Dream Focus 01:00, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
I am a student at the University of Chicago Law School taking a course on feminist economics. I am interested in updating this article to provide additional context for understanding the backlog problem in the United States. My early thoughts for accomplishing this include the following:
I am very interested in receiving feedback on my proposed changes. I have added a list of potential references to my user page and welcome any suggestions for additional sources. Medleya ( talk) 15:06, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
I am looking forward to updating this article over the course of the next two weeks as part of a course at the University of Chicago Law School. My initial proposal (above) focused on the United States, but I have decided to work towards creating a more global perspective instead. The following is a detailed description and rationale for my proposed changes:
Intentions Generally:
Work Plan:
I am very interested in receiving feedback on my proposed expansion and reorganization. Any tips on other countries to look at would be very helpful as well. Thanks! Medleya ( talk) 23:49, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
Great work so far! I think it’s great that you have added so much to the current state of rape kit usage and its obstacles. If I were to suggest anything, it would be to include illustrations (pictures of a rape kit or of the components of a generic rape kit would be a really great addition) and to watch out for the current balance of the article. Although well written, the article focuses a lot on hindrances to usage in the United States. While this is valuable and shouldn’t be removed, I also feel like it currently outweighs the writing done on a rape kit and its primary usage. This makes it less so an encyclopedia entry and more so like a directed literature review. I’m sure it’ll balance out well after you have completed the article, but that is what I would watch out for while continuing to develop it! Patriqueliu ( talk) 02:24, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi April, First, I want to say that the information you have added so far has truly developed the article and shed light on the important issues in the topic. The article is understandable by all audiences as well. As for suggestions, I think you could develop the introduction to touch upon the important issues of impacts and barriers that you explain later. I also believe you could use illustrations to make the article more inviting and to create a larger impact on the audience. Lastly, I think you could add more information on suggested reforms and best practices. Slklose ( talk) 06:13, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
I am currently editing this article to give it a more global perspective. I find that the amount of information on the rape kit backlog in the United States overwhelms the article, and yet still needs further expansion. To remedy this, I'd like to create a new page entitled "Rape kit backlog in the United States." The current article will still describe the backlog problem, and include a short summary in the " by country" section, but will then link to the new page that will provide a more detailed account of causes, funding, legislation, and state-specific information. I am interested to hear feedback on this proposal! Thanks! Medleya ( talk) 13:37, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Rape kit. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:59, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
In a quick scan of the article, I didn't see anything to do with the use of these examination kits on male victims of sexual assault. Did I miss something? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Godofredo29 ( talk • contribs) 02:35, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
I've been researching this, and all I can find are numbers of rape kits used but not tested. How many are used and tested? It seems like an important number. Can someone find it and add it? PapayaSF ( talk) 00:42, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
I added to this article under the backlog section that the real number of tested versus untested is unknown because there is no system to keep track of the kits. If anyone has more resources that add it would greatly improve the article. Jpena6 ( talk) 15:07, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
I'm happy to see Marty Goddard's role discussed in the article, as is overdue. I'm a little concerned, however, that the material surrounded her (here and in the article on her) is so heavily sourced to the recent NYTimes piece, which I note is apparently in the Opinion section. I also note that the article on Louis R. Vitullo is probably not WP:NPOV right now. Perhaps there are stronger sources that emphasize Goddard's role? With the current sources, I suggest that generally we should say in wikivoice that the kits were developed by Goddard and Vitullo (which is supported already by the 1978 nytimes article), and attribute (per WP:RSEDITORIAL) statements from the recent opinion piece to the author. @ Tdslk: pinging you as originator of the article on Goddard, and as having thought about the sourcing recently. Russ Woodroofe ( talk) 12:03, 25 June 2020 (UTC)