Talk:Follow the Rabbit-Proof Fence

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Australia: Western Australia / Literature / Indigenous peoples Low‑importance

	Australia portal Follow the Rabbit-Proof Fence is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Western Australia (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian literature (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Indigenous peoples of Australia (assessed as High-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Western Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Women writers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers 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.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ten years in summary[edit]

A revision on of 18:11, 4 December 2012 added "They are back home after 10 years" to the summary. Worded this way, the meaning wasn't clear. It could mean it took 10 years for them to walk back home or it could simply mean they were back home 10 years later. If the latter, it might be equally valid to say they were back home 9 years later, or 12 years later. The former is clearly wrong. Subsequent edits changed it to "They back home 10 after 10 years" and "They got back home after 10 years." I removed the line. Note that the reference to the Matheo article in the Telegraph was there before the line in question was added. SlowJog (talk) 07:19, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Misrepresentation of the book[edit]

The point is that the book tells a completely different story from the film. It explains the very valid reasons for the children's removal. No cages. Good treatment.

Completely missing from this. Tuntable (talk) 00:07, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]