Difference between revisions of "Directory:The Wikipedia Point of View/Pornopedia/2010-May porn purge"
MyWikiBiz, Author Your Legacy — Sunday November 24, 2024
Jump to navigationJump to search| (5 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 43: | Line 43: | ||
*[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)&oldid=360967824#Re-upload_Commons_artwork_that.27s_been_deleted_by_Jimbo_Wales Village pump discussion] | *[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)&oldid=360967824#Re-upload_Commons_artwork_that.27s_been_deleted_by_Jimbo_Wales Village pump discussion] | ||
*[http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&oldid=39105308#I_have_responded Don't think about the children] | *[http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&oldid=39105308#I_have_responded Don't think about the children] | ||
| + | *[http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Village_pump&oldid=39121435#Sexual_content More discussion at the 'Village pump'] | ||
== Wales attacked by the community== | == Wales attacked by the community== | ||
| Line 55: | Line 56: | ||
* [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaannounce-l/2010-May/000008.html Statement by Michael Snow] | * [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaannounce-l/2010-May/000008.html Statement by Michael Snow] | ||
*[http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-May/057800.html Statement by Sydney Poore] "I support the clean up effort by Jimmy and the administrators on Commons for the images that have no significant educational value. I also understand that to some editors who are new to thinking about the issue that this may seem abrupt. So, I encourage good communication between all the stakeholders so that we can understand each others concerns and address them." | *[http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-May/057800.html Statement by Sydney Poore] "I support the clean up effort by Jimmy and the administrators on Commons for the images that have no significant educational value. I also understand that to some editors who are new to thinking about the issue that this may seem abrupt. So, I encourage good communication between all the stakeholders so that we can understand each others concerns and address them." | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Reaction of 'Victim of Censorship'== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Wise words from a respected contributor to Wikipedia Review [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=29506&view=findpost&p=236129]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | :No school, with children, should be allowed to have ANY access to Wikipedia. School boards and library boards should consider Wikipedia to be pornographic website catering to pedophiles, and Namblers, and as such, has a reputation for its lack of control, governance and responsibility to its patrons. Wikipedia should be banned from any respectable institution of learning. | ||
Latest revision as of 15:13, 13 May 2010
News coverage
- Wikipedia purges porn Fox news 7 May
- Wikimedia dumps porn following FoxNews probe Silicon Republic 10 May
- Wikimedia pornography row deepens as Wales cedes rights BBC 10 May
- Wikipedia-porn-row-sees-founder-give-up-his-editing-privileges Daily Telegraph 11 May
- Wikipedia roiled by porn row The Inquirer 11 May
- Commons:News regarding the sexual content purge
Wales' purge
- Wales' deletion log. A red link indicates a deletion that stuck. A blue link indicates subsequent restoration.
Restored material
Material that was always there
- List of genitalia
- Wikipedia editor's child porn collection (now deleted).
- Bad images
- Worst_of_Wikipedia#Revolting
Debates on the Commons and Meta-wiki
Wikipedia culture
Evidence that the political culture of Wikipedia is deeply hostile to getting rid of porn.
- Rosenzweig, fatuous comment on Wales' talk page
- David Gerard "These vicious morons"
- Wales' talk page at commons
- Wales' talk page at en:Wkipedia
- Pro-pedo POV pushers
- pro-bestiality POV pushers
- Sexualised images of children and the Wikipedia mascot
- Paid shills for the porn industry
- Pedophiles can be productive editors
- "The censorship of centuries-old art is a very frightening event" a Wikipedia editor speaks to the press.
- Pedophiles are welcome
- Hand wringing over whether they should be welcome
- Should 6 year olds be allowed to edit?
- Public librarian user DGG says "There is no general agreement here that any system of filtering for any purpose is ever necessary, and I think it is totally contrary to the entire general idea behind the the free culture movement.
- Village pump discussion
- Don't think about the children
- More discussion at the 'Village pump'
Wales attacked by the community
Reaction of Wikimedia foundation
- Wales admits deletions to foundation
- Statement by Michael Snow
- Statement by Sydney Poore "I support the clean up effort by Jimmy and the administrators on Commons for the images that have no significant educational value. I also understand that to some editors who are new to thinking about the issue that this may seem abrupt. So, I encourage good communication between all the stakeholders so that we can understand each others concerns and address them."
Reaction of 'Victim of Censorship'
Wise words from a respected contributor to Wikipedia Review [1].
- No school, with children, should be allowed to have ANY access to Wikipedia. School boards and library boards should consider Wikipedia to be pornographic website catering to pedophiles, and Namblers, and as such, has a reputation for its lack of control, governance and responsibility to its patrons. Wikipedia should be banned from any respectable institution of learning.
