Take a guess as to which news outlet called Wikipedia a "worldwide network of pedophiles". - Polidicks

[url]http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/06/25/exclusive-pedophiles-find-home-on-wikipedia/[/url] [release]Wikipedia has become home base for a loose worldwide network of pedophiles who are campaigning to spin the popular online encyclopedia in their favor and are trying to lure more people into their world, an investigation by FoxNews.com confirms. Chat room posts show a clear effort by pedophiles to use Wikipedia, which can be accessed unfiltered in public schools across the country, to further their agenda. Message board posts often include links to specific Wikipedia articles that the participants say need to be edited to "normalize" pedophile behavior in the public eye and to recruit more pedophiles into their community. “Pedophiles have campaigned to push their point of view that 'pedophilia is OK and doesn’t hurt children' on Wikipedia,” says Xavier Von Erck, director of the online pedophile watchdog organization Perverted Justice Foundation and Wikisposure.com, its offshoot project devoted to tracking pedophiles and pedophile activism on Wikipedia. “This has been a problem since Wikipedia started.” In response to a request for comment on this story, Sue Gardner, executive director of Wikimedia Foundation, Wikipedia's parent organization, said in a statement: "Wikipedia has a long-held, zero-tolerance policy towards pedophilia or pedophilia advocacy and child pornography. The Wikimedia community is vigilant about identifying and deleting any such material. Any allegations to the contrary are outrageous and false." On April 22, a user with the screen name “apple” on the BoyChat message board posted a call for pedophiles around the world to start a Wikipedia article devoted to the author of a memoir described as “the life history of a lover of boys!!” (BoyChat is a notorious, long-running online message board for adults who are attracted to underage boys.) A user named “Drowning, not waving” replied in a post called “apple get that Wikipedia entry written”: “IMO still the best autobiography written by a bl [boy lover]. A must read, despite (or because of) depicting a very different world to today's. "And don't forget his Some Boys for a fleshier look at his interaction with the world.” Three years ago, on Annabelleigh.net, an online message board for adults who are sexually attracted to prepubescent girls, a user named “student” outlined the campaign to use Wikipedia as a platform for activism and to recruit more pedophiles. (Annabelleigh, also called GirlChat, is the sister site to BoyChat.) The Annabelle post, titled “Keep your eye on the prize,” read: “The most important function Wikipedia serves is via the pedophilia articles themselves. It is important that they remain fair and unbiased. It is important that they continue to have external links to the support and activist community. The user pages are much less important. "It is of the utmost importance that pedophiles newly daring to google "pedophile" or "pedophilia," or look them up directly in Wikipedia, in an effort to understand themselves better, are able to get unbiased information …. Many of these men and women are in dire need of support. "Secondly, nonpedophiles who recognize the increasingly sensationalistic media treatment, etc., and turn to the Web to find the facts or people who use the Web as their primary source of information: If they turn to Wikipedia, Wikipedia should give a fair and balanced view. This community needs that to happen…. "That should be the primary focus of our Wikipedia efforts. If you have to 'lie and hide' to keep our influence balanced against the bigots, then by all means lie and hide to do it. By all means, do not give up the fight to self-identify on the user pages, but make sure you do not let it stop you from editing!” Wikipedia's critics point out that schools throughout the U.S. encourage students to do research on the online encyclopedia, which is free and available to anyone with an Internet connection. This means that students who use Wikipedia to research the academic subject of pedophilia will immediately find a page on the topic that is being targeted by the pedophiles. Wikipedia's "Pedophilia" page also is the first "hit" when you search the term in Google or Bing. The article on pedophilia, in its suggestions for further reading, suggests other Wikipedia pages edited by pedophiles, including "Child Sexuality," and "NAMBLA," a page about the North American Man/Boy Love Association. That page links directly to NAMBLA's website, as do 25 other Wikipedia pages. Wikipedia also has 32 external links to GirlChat, 14 to a Danish pro-pedophile website and 12 to BoyChat. FoxNews.com also found hundreds of posts on BoyChat linking to Wikipedia pages, including "Child Sex Tourism," which provides detailed information on the different laws regarding child prostitution in countries around the world, and which links to newspaper articles that highlight “hotspots” like a section of Mexico City where child exploitation is rampant and unchecked by law enforcement. Other recent links were to Wikipedia pages named “Sexual Objectification," "Child Erotica" and “Simulated Child Pornography.” These Wikipedia articles, edited and shared by pedophiles, are nothing but guideposts to get them aroused, says Hemanshu Nigam, who headed security divisions at Microsoft and MySpace and now runs SSP Blue, an online security consulting firm. Posts on BoyChat also instruct participants to hide their identities and avoid being blocked by other users while editing pedophilia-related articles on Wikipedia. Anyone can edit an article on Wikipedia as long as he follows Wikipedia’s principles of having a neutral point of view, which means the articles aren’t supposed to take sides on any issue and they must cite “verifiable, authoritative sources,” according to Wikipedia. Some pages are protected and can be edited only by volunteer administrators who have a certain number of edits and days editing under their belt, while other pages are fully protected and may be edited only by volunteer administrators or stewards voted on by the community. If someone makes an edit that other members of the community don’t approve, they can revert that edit or, in more drastic circumstances, nominate the entire page for deletion. The deletion request is then commented on by other members of the community until a consensus is reached. (Click here to see Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines page and here for the fundamental principles by which Wikipedia operates.] But an investigation by FoxNews.com shows that pedophiles are gaming this system, using their message boards to rally opposition and to sabotage attempts by other Wikipedia community members to rid the online encyclopedia of pro-pedophilia content. For example a 2007 post on BoyChat calls on the pedophile community to vote against another user’s request to delete a Wikipedia page called “Marthijn Uittenbogaard,” named for the leader of a defunct Dutch political party that had three members and advocated for the legalization of sex between adults and children. After the page was nominated for deletion by multiple Wikipedia users, a BoyChat user named “SqueakBox” wrote on the blog: “Hysterical antiped lists Marthijn Uittenbogaard for wikipedia scrapheap! "Get yer' votes in -" The blog post concludes with a link to the Wikipedia page where the proposed deletion was being voted on. The site remains active today. Wikisposure has identified hundreds of convicted pedophiles and well-known pedophilia activists who have been members of Wikipedia’s community of volunteers who edit articles on the online encyclopedia. Some pedophiles active on Wikipedia have been sent to prison on charges relating to child pornography, according to Wikisposure, which has assisted in some of the investigations. Von Erck, who uses a pseudonym, said a number of pedophiles have been kicked off the site, but many of them have returned using different usernames. “The problem with it is you need to have a committed effort to deal with committed people who are devoted to pushing their propaganda online like pedophiles,” he said. But Nigam, who is co-chairman of President Obama's Online Safety Technology Group and sits on the board of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, said it's not that complicated. "Almost every other social networking site has taken steps to clean up their sites, except for Wikipedia," he said. Nigam said Wikipedia is making a conscious choice to abandon its responsibility by hosting an online haven for pedophiles. “It’s nothing more than a company that is choosing to ignore the worst kind of exploitation in the world,” he said.[/release] tl;dr fearmongering bullshit Oh :foxnews:, why do you keep amazing us with your stupidity?

took me 1/10 of a second to figure out it was them

Wikipedia, more like wikipedophillia....Nope. It's bullshit. I'm pretty sure that wikipedia isn't a social networking site, and i'm pretty sure the pedos aren't looking for kids on wikipedia. They have other sites for that.

[QUOTE=JDK721;22892565]took me 1/10 of a second to figure out it was them[/QUOTE] Yup.

Wtf are they even trying to say?

How come they aren't accusing conservapedia of being pedos? I mean seriously, this guy is its top contributor: [img]http://www.conservapedia.com/images/b/bc/Ed_poor_grinning.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=wonkadonk;22892606]How come they aren't accusing conservapedia of being pedos? I mean seriously, this guy is its top contributor:[/QUOTE] conservatives have the lord on their side they know wrong from right unlike the liberals I will be praying for you

[I]"The internet is a network for pedophiles."[/I] :foxnews:

I thought it was the westboro baptist church at first.

Quick, someone e-mail Glenn Beck a link to jailbaitgallery.

im not surprised fox are a bunch of lonely fags that want attention by any means possible

o... so thats how the pedophile found me...

[IMG_thumb]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/23/Jimmy_Wales_Fundraiser_Appeal_edit.jpg[/IMG_thumb] The face of a pedophile

Huh. I guessed CNN.

Someone at Fox News logged on to Encyclopedia Dramatica and confused it with Wikipedia.

[QUOTE=killz2much;22892783]Someone at Fox News logged on to Encyclopedia Dramatica and confused it with Wikipedia.[/QUOTE] I wouldn't put it passed them to do something as dimwitted as that.

How can Bill O Reilly still talk shit about things after the loofah falafel incident?

It's always fox news. Always.

Did anyone actually read this article?

[QUOTE=Dog_Of_War;22893042]Did anyone actually read this article?[/QUOTE] i stopped when i saw fox news

but wait, i'm a junior editor on wikipedia does that mean they called me a pedophile? does that mean I can sue for libel?

[quote=Wikipedia's article on pedophilia; opening statement]Pedophilia (or paedophilia) is a psychiatric disorder in adults or late adolescents (persons age 16 and older) for whom prepubescent children are the primary or exclusive sexual object of their sex drive.[1][2][3] According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), pedophilia is a paraphilia in which a person has intense and recurrent sexual urges towards and fantasies about children they have either acted on or cause distress or interpersonal difficulty.[4] The disorder is common among people who commit child sexual abuse;[5][6][7] however, some offenders do not meet the clinical diagnosis standards for pedophilia.[8] In strictly behavioral contexts, the word "pedophilia" has been used to refer to child sexual abuse itself, also called "pedophilic behavior".[6][9][10][11][12] In law enforcement, the term "pedophile" is loosely used without formal definition to describe those convicted of child sexual abuse or the sexual abuse of a minor, including both prepubescent children and pubescent or post-pubescent adolescents.[13][14] An example of this use can be seen in various forensic training manuals. Researchers recommend that this imprecise use be avoided.[13] In common usage, the term refers to any adult who is sexually attracted to young children[15] or who sexually abuses a child or adolescent minor.[12][16] The causes of pedophilia are not known; research is ongoing.[17] Most pedophiles are men, though there are also women who are pedophiles.[11][18][19] Studies in the United Kingdom and United States suggest that a range of 5% to 20% of child sexual abuse offenses are perpetrated by women.[20] In forensic psychology and law enforcement, there have been a variety of typologies suggested to categorize pedophiles according to behavior and motivations.[14] No significant curative treatment for pedophilia has yet been found. There are, however, certain therapies that can reduce the incidence of pedophilic behaviors that result in child sexual abuse.[6][21][/quote] Keep pushing that pedo propaganda wikipedia, we're on to you. :cop:

Pfffffffffffffffffffffffff- [b]lol what!?[/b] Who the fuck actually got paid to write this!?

Oh wow. EDIT: I love how its an "exclusive" story.

Fox News: The Internet is ran by Paedophiles! CNN: Paedophiles gain support in suing for more rights.

[QUOTE=killz2much;22892783]Someone at Fox News logged on to Encyclopedia Dramatica and confused it with Wikipedia.[/QUOTE]

"Take a guess as to which news outlet" This is literally when I thought Fox.

Wow, that article seemed pretty low even for Fox I would have thought. Every piece of "evidence" they have is so obviously biased that it's just difficult to read through the article at all without slamming your head on the keyboard.

and yet, i bet fox news uses wikipedia for their sources

[QUOTE=lolwutdude;22894581]and yet, i bet fox news uses wikipedia for their sources[/QUOTE] Wikipedia is WAY too reliable for it to be a Fox source.