Talk:Latchkey kid

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Latchkey kid article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Psychology Mid‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology 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.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Education Mid‑importance

	Education portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-related topics 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.EducationWikipedia:WikiProject EducationTemplate:WikiProject Educationeducation
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Colbert-inspired Vandalism

This article was mentioned on the television show The Colbert Report. Wed. Aug 2, 2006 on Comedy Central. He jokingly suggested that Latchkey kids grow up to be serial killers and referenced this page at which point hundreds of viewers pointed their browsers to this page, some with the purpose of changing the entry to fit his argument. Fritsky 20:36, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

latchkey smatchkey

Just in case anyone was wondering, it took approximately 13 seconds from the point when Colbert made his statement for the site to be "protected." User:Dragonstrider 04:05, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that Colbert holds a personal grudge against WP. This is the 2nd time in 2 days that a spur of vandalism has errupted because of his show. Maybe his page was vandalized and he viewed it one time. Jds10912 18:58, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was Hirshman who brought up WP on the show -- SC just spun it into a joke

Why can't Colbert's opinion on laychkey's be voiced?

Cause the moderators here suck. (68.32.79.169 03:59, 3 August 2006 (UTC))[reply]

No, because Wikipedia is supposed to be a repository of knowledge, not pop culture references from a television program, no matter how good or well produced it may be. --Omaryak 04:17, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: Referenced on Colbert Report - beware of more vandalism - can an admin protect the article? - Tanman 03:55, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

already protected. alphaChimp ^laudare 03:55, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, crazy, do we have nothing better to do than watch Colbert and wikipedia stuff? -Dewdude

Is there anything better? OK, yeah, but it's a short list. Phaedrus420 04:25, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's true, 9 out of 10 Latchkey kids really do go crazy and kill people, I feel it in my gut. Typical liberal media bias. -Deb4ser

Not to encourage Colbert vandalism, and not to insist that he's right (like the elephant people), but are there are sources that point one way or the other? I mean, it's one thing to take down, "LATCHKEY KIDS IZ NUTZ AND KILLZ THINGZ," but I think it would mean a lot more to put up, "And Latchkey Kids show only a 1% more likelyhood of going crazy than a child raised by their parents (see reference" (Note, I made that number up with no foundation and do not mean to imply that it is fact in any way.) So does anyone know what the actual statistics are?Elbow 18:25, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heads up

Some related articles, such as Nanny and Day care, are also seeing instances of vandalism. --Omaryak 06:32, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm watching this with amused interest, as we appear to be entering an era whenever anyone on TV makes a joke about Wikipedia pages have to get locked down. -- Boradis 08:57, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing incidents like this almost make me wish Wikipedia could have articles like this one work with a "stable version" and a "working version." That way there could be a stable version that gets updated periodically and is seen by users who come to the page, and a working version which is free for anyone to edit. Since no individual page seems to be able to survive media exposure without getting locked down, in some cases it might help to have a way to still work on the page.--BigCow 02:02, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unbalanced

Aside from the Colbert Report vandalization (you should also check "latchkey"), this page seems unbalanced. I think it casts so called "latchkey kids" in a negative light which is not merited.

i'd like to see a little more of the positive side to latchkey children. i was always one, and reading this makes it seem like my mother was a terrible person and my childhood was screwed. i turned out just fine, with none of these negative effects. balance people, balance. JoeSmack ^Talk 19:31, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The protection on this article will be reduced/removed soon. In the meantime feel free to start using this talk page (although it's a little busy tonight) to start writing any updates. — xaosflux ^Talk 04:21, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any process / approval cycle if someone (like me) wants to reorganize the entire page into sections of Background (e.g. where the term came from, standard use), Psychological Effects (both good and bad), and "Random Facts" such as the book reference? Or does someone just go for it and see if it sticks? Thanks! Jonemerson 07:14, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Be bold! /blahedo (t) 05:58, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this is necessarily baised, I think it reads more or less neutral?(voice99) —Preceding undated comment added 15:52, 21 May 2009 (UTC).[reply]

done 68.134.243.51 (talk) 20:08, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lizzie Borden page...

...might also need protection, just reverted 3 Colbert vandalisms there. NawlinWiki 04:13, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The strange, strange Internet world of the future. Someday we'll look back on these days and decry our loss of innocence. --Bfoaz 04:15, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Free PR

Not only does this give the Wikipedia community some free PR, in some twisted way in points out the problem of "real" news oulets using half-fact and opinion to back some statements up.

Heads up - Colbert Report repeat tonight

According to the main Comedy Central web site, the episode with the Linda Hirshman interview that mentions this Wikipedia article is set to rerun tonight. Nofactzone 22:36, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Watching that episode tonight led me to this talk page... Vash The Stampede 00:56, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Colbert

I see nothing wrong with creating a "In Popular Culture" section of the article where the whole colbert problem is mentioned. Additionally, it can provide where the term "latchkey kid" is mentioned or made fun of. This should be done to all the articles that have had problems regard colbert. There could even be a "list of" article stating all the article that have been vandalised as a result of the colbert report. Anyone else agree with me? comments Lue3378 07:55, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that a List of Wikipedia articles mentioned in the Colbert Report smacks too much of self-reference. But you're right that articles can mention (In popular culture) what Colbert has insinuated about them —whether or not he mentioned Wikipedia at the time. —Toby Bartels 19:30, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Census Facts

I believe the 3rd paragraph about children 5 to 14 ia citing page 12-13 of the census document linked, But the numbers were not the same, and the language was misleading. I have changed it to give a more accurate picture. If this is not the section of the document the section was refering to, I may be incorrect, and appologize. Let me kno. ._-zro 04:33, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a link

I work for the America's Most Wanted Safety Center, a new branch of America's Most Wanted getting away from the capturing of criminals, and branching out to all aspects of safety. I feel a link to our post about what parents should do if they have to leave children home alone would be appropriate and mutually beneficial, and filled with tips that parents might need to know if they leave their kids at home alone. The link is http://www.amw.com/safety/?p=83 please consider it. Jrosenfe 13:25, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

School Latchkey Programs

I'm not sure wide spread this is, but at my schools in Waterford Michigan (Knudsen, Della Lutes, and Pierce Highschool) there were afterschool programs that were basically day care, in the first two schools it was actually called Latchkey, at Pierce it was just the afterschool program. The idea was just to give the kids anything to do at school for about two hours until their parents got off work.76.112.50.23 (talk) 03:45, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image?

I'm not going to mess with anything here, since I'm far from an expert on Wikipedia style or the subject of this article. I may be wrong, but I don't think the image has anything whatsoever to do with the concept of a "latchkey kid." I'm not sure any image at all would be relevant to this article. 69.115.136.128 (talk) 06:46, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article says "The term refers to the latchkey of a door to a house. The key is often strung around the child's neck or left hidden under a mat (or some other object) at the rear door to the property." and this second aspect is what the image is illustrating. --McGeddon (talk) 12:11, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Latchkey kid. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.cprd.uiuc.edu/research/school-pubs/MSJ%20article%20(May%2003).pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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} 11:49, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Various

Article seems very US-centric. I'd be very surprised if this is a purely or mainly US-phenomenon. I'm also sceptical that this would only have existed since WWII, even if the name dates from then. Finally, {fact} needed for the claim that the kids would typically wear their key around their neck. Why would they do that, rather than e.g. keeping in a pocket like anyone else? Iapetus (talk) 23:04, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing phrase

This phrase is confusing. Wolf O'Donnel (talk) 03:07, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The term refers to children as young as five years old who provide care or to older children who supervise their younger siblings.

Article doesn’t seem to follow WP:NPOV

There seems to be a noticeable negative POV of latchkey children in this article, specifically the “effects on children” section. Should I put a notice in the section? -Tax Fraud! [she/they] (talk | contrib.) 21:45, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Better, or earlier entomology.

https://www.eater.com/21446024/snack-diet-of-a-latchkey-kids Chuckbirdman (talk) 20:23, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Single authority on the status of latchkey kids

Article mentions the documentary "To Save Our Children to Save Our Schools", then uses a single quote from a single interview as fact instead of one person's definition of the term:

These latchkey children, referred to as "day orphans" in the 1984 documentary, To Save Our Children to Save Our Schools, mainly came from middle or upper-class homes. The higher the educational attainment of the parents, the higher the odds the children of this time would be latchkey kids.

Quote for which this is derived:

"Latchkey children tend to come from middle-class or upper-middle-class homes; in fact, the higher the educational attainment of the parents, the higher the odds that they will have latchkey children. But at least there are books in those homes and although there is not that sustained attention and care when they come home, there is a vision, an expectation that they will one day move into the mainstream of this nation’s life--and most likely they will." - Marshal Frady

Latchkey children, depending on definition, can come from any class but is most widely associated with the working-class or lower-class households. Many would say that only lower and lower-middle class households produce latchkey kids. While such a strict definition is probably unwarranted, it is ridiculous to say that latchkey kids tend not to come from working-class households. 73.237.102.56 (talk) 20:46, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Latchkey Term

It's not obvious that latchkey just means what we'd call a regular key. In the article, latchkey links to Latch, which does not mention keys.

The term just means "kid with a key", I suggest latchkey should link to "key". 73.197.151.48 (talk) 17:10, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]