Date: December 29, 2014
Thanks to Šimon Falko @simgiran for this heads up…
Since there is only a date specifying the page’s last modification, I have no idea when this official policy was adopted…But as anyone familiar with the historical plight of “pedophiles” trying to be Wikipedia editors can tell you…what they’ve put into words here, has been a long term, unofficial practice at Wikipedia.
There was always a problem, with regards to “pedophiles” having their articles and edits undone [or deleted]…and just a general atmosphere of condescension, nastiness and snubbing.
There was always a problem as regards to terminology neutrality, as well…wherever an article had anything to do with “pedophiles”, or the Child Love movement and the like. This was especially galling, when considering how much terminology with well known negative connotation got used, and painted “pedophiles” in a very bad way.
I might not be the best person to outline this problem…but having been behind the scenes at Newgon, while three or four others were attempting to edit on Wikipedia…I can tell you, I saw and read enough long discussion threads, about what was going on behind the scenes at Wikipedia…and how certain articles were being watched by certain editors [like a hawk], who would swoop in and delete any new edits they had made…some even violating community protocol, in their own actions.
One thing that became clear…is that any Wikipedia editor could disparage and slander “pedophiles”, even in the face of neutrality rules [where this was supposed to be against the rules of Wikipedia]…Another thing that became clear…is that anyone discovered to be a “pedophile” [or strongly suspected to be one], would be watched and targeted by other editors…No matter how neutral, well written or sound the content published by a “pedophile”, it would virtually always disappear within hours…In some of the worst outcomes, “pedophile” editors found themselves unceremoniously banned, because certain people did not like how they were writing or editing articles.
Initially, this led to a lot of squabbling on Wikipedia…and a lot of “tug of war” re-edits, concerning a few Wikipedia articles.
Jimmy Wales [the guy who started Wikipedia], refused to step in and stand up for the equal rights of all Wikipedia editors…and this unofficial practice of censorship, sometimes “quiet” banishment, went on for I don’t even know how long…But apparently, they’ve now made it official…They’ve finally owned their dirty practice, in a public way.
I think where the monumental failure of Wikipedia really sunk in for me…is when reading a beautifully crafted, very neutral version of a Wikipedia article on the Child Love movement…and realizing that it all got replaced with some shallow, slanted tripe, which could not even be called informative…It was a pathetic slap in the face, in comparison to what had previously been there [admittedly, a well written article posted by a “pedophile”] …And if I am not mistaken, that entire article page got shut down, when someone forced it to merge with the “pedophile advocacy” page.
It was an endless struggle for “pedophiles” to get an actually sound article on the Child Love movement onto Wikipedia, with people pulling various dirty moves to constantly disrupt it all.
So, let’s take a look at a few things on this Wikipedia policy page.
“Wikipedia regards the safety of children using the site as a key issue. Editors who attempt to use Wikipedia to pursue or facilitate inappropriate adult–child relationships, who advocate inappropriate adult–child relationships on- or off-wiki (e.g. by expressing the view that inappropriate relationships are not harmful to children), or who identify themselves as pedophiles, will be blocked indefinitely.”
Here we see some extreme, grotesque prejudice, being exhibited by Wikipedia. You can no longer even so much as identify yourself as a “pedophile”, without getting banned from Wikipedia.
…Amazing…Truly amazing…Such staggering ignorance.
If you’re a “pedophile”…then you are “not good enough, to participate on Wikipedia”?!…
It sounds like the people of Wikipedia are living in the wrong era…Because this sort of thing belongs with the militant racists and homophobes.
I am finding it impossible, to see any difference between the people behind this policy, and those who militantly spew hate and intolerance.
News Alert to Wikipedia: Being a pedophile is not a threat to child safety…Nor does it make anybody incapable of adhering to Wikipedia’s editing guidelines…
…Problem is, you people keep moving the goal lines and manipulating the parameters, whenever a “pedophile” gets involved…Your game you are playing, is nothing but a sham…And many of us have known this for years. You simply do not respect or treat us as fellow human beings.
Oh!…and I would be derelict, if I failed to point out Wikipedia’s blatant threat, against those who fail to accept the “all inappropriate adult/child relationships are absolutely harmful” slogan…chant…party line…mental conditioning propaganda…whatever you want to call this hive mentality, they are bullying down everyone’s throat.
…If you think for yourself, you are not welcome on Wikipedia!
“If you are concerned about the behavior of another editor, please contact Wikipedia’s Arbitration Committee at…”
…Here we get into something which quickly went through my mind, when I first started to read this policy page…
If they are going to be this brazenly in the wrong about people who admit to being “pedophiles”…what does this mean for individuals, who busybodies of Wikipedia simply suspect of being a “pedophile”…or who these busybodies merely don’t like, on the basis that they don’t like the way they’ve edited some articles?
…And they offer a discrete way to contact Wikipedia big wigs, to report the communists amongst them…Oops!!…I mean, “pedophiles” amongst them…
Sorry about that, but the parallels are striking…McCarthy era panic, and what is going on here.
Do you think they are all too deeply invested, to figure out that they’ve got an inborn witch hunt on their hands, here?
I see they also offer a way to report images…as if we are going to open up an account, and start uploading child porn onto Wikipedia, or something…
…Oh yeah…This is hard core, dementia level witch hunting.
…But hey…you might find one or two idiots who try that kind of stunt…Might as well paint the rest of us with that same brush, to make it clear what obscene bigots you are…right?
…Hey, it’s only aimed at “pedophiles”…and you don’t look upon us as being human at Wikipedia, do you?…No…We are “the other”…”the boogieman”…Right?
So, for all intents and purposes…a Wikipedia moderator can shut you down, if they simply don’t like the way you present anything related [directly or indirectly] to “pedophilia”?
“Advice for young editors: If you are a younger editor and feel that another person on Wikipedia is behaving in a way that you feel threatens your personal safety, or worries you in any way whatsoever, please tell a responsible adult, and ask them to look at this page. Do not continue to communicate with the other person – ignore them completely. Never give out information such as your address or phone number to anyone, including people who say they are trying to help you. When in doubt about whether certain information is too personal to share, do not give it out.”
On this page at Wikipedia, which is a clearly dehumanizing swipe at “pedophiles” [and frankly, constitutes hate speech as well as hateful behavior]…someone imagined it proper, to include this “message to young editors”, which is promoting a very injurious stereotype.
…In addition, there are parallels to the Hitler Youth, in this behavior…Get the kids to turn on whomever the social target is…Get them to turn others in…even if they just suspect something, or “feel worried in any way whatsoever”…
An honest reaction to this…
…I have no history of being a Wikipedia editor…I’ve never wanted to be one, and the insane depths of social politics on Wikipedia turned me right off…But I thought I knew enough about them, to suggest that they did not allow children to be editors…Am I wrong about this?…I’m not interested enough in the legal answer, to go dig it up…But my point is, I never thought there was any real chance of “pedophiles” intermingling with children on Wikipedia…Potentially teenagers, but still…That does not mean a “pedophile” would do anything at all inappropriate.
Even if someone were so ignorant, as to be sincere in their intent to include this content on that page…I have to ask a few questions…
…Did they honestly have a problem with this in the first place?…
…And why is this being mixed in, with your policy on people who merely self identify as “pedophiles”, and/or people who are suspected of being “pedophiles”, and whether they are allowed to be editors?
…You do understand at Wikipedia, that this is hyperbolic behavior?…You are not just tainting “pedophiles” who’ve participated on your website, but you are smearing all of us…by implying that we are some “obvious danger”, for merely existing and being there.
Wikipedia deserves to be considered a hate group.
…But thanks for the clarification, Wikipedia…and for putting out the “pedophiles not welcome” sign…It took you long enough to fly your truly ugly colors…but, there they are…And we can now point to it, when explaining what a truly disgusting organization Wikipedia is.
A curious piece of trivia: At the bottom of BoyChat [http://www.boychat.org], you can find the backwards and upside down phrase “Jimbo Wales sucks donkey snot”…And it is related to Jimmy’s spineless lack of integrity, during all of this…A sort of protest, over his willingness to allow Wikipedia to become just another source of prejudice, discrimination and censorship.
…I’ve been saying for years, Wikipedia is garbage…I do not use Wikipedia anymore…Have not, for the longest time.
For this, Wikipedia is recipient of: