QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Wed 12th August 2009, 3:58pm)
We need a call to action to stop Kev before he erases all of the good stuff from Wikipedia! (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/hrmph.gif)
Well, Horse, at least you should be grateful that he alerts you to what is up for the chop so you can save the pages as screenshots for your stable wall ...
Let's face it, its pretty pathetic for an "Encyclopedia" when all it takes to become "notable" is getting your yah-yahs out for a tug material in February 2003.
Trying to inject some intelligence into this discussion, I must say that although I consider your chosen task both worthy and Herculean in scale, I still cannot decide whether it is actually
Augean ... or indeed
Sisyphean.
That is to say, given the enormous quantity of dung on the Pee-dia, and the propensity of the immortal beasts within it to make copious amounts of more, I cannot see how you are ever going to wash all the filth out in one lifetime. I am left wondering if you have overstepped your status by considering yourself peer enough of the Wiki-Gods by rightfully report their indiscretions and whether you are binding yourself to an eternity of frustration rolling your rock upto the top of the hill only for them to push it back down.
What I would suggest is starting to document your habitual opposers and your supporters and engaging in a 'hearts and minds' courtesy campaign thanking those admins that help you. In fact, I'd consider re-marketing yourself around just this 'single issue', appealing to interest groups, seeing who or what comes to aid you.
I wonder whether keeping a list of porno-defenders on your user pages would ire them too much?The thing is, as you note, at some point or another you are going to split the community over your activity and, if you continue on wisely, raise this whole issue until it has to be "discussed". Its the sort of issue that most people would considered to be too risky and futile to attempt risking their user account for.
•
Parental guidance mechanismI'd say you need powerful allies outside of Wiki-world and I'd be asking them ... why all the porn and nuddie-pictures in an encyclopedia which children are encouraged to look looking for their homework and which has no parental guidance mechanism? If you worked the 'parental guidance' angle, you could become a far more effective pain in theirs asses. In truth, I cant even see the PPP (Pro-Porno Pee-dians) having a good argument against that.
If you could work this successfully, you could have much more effect on the Pee-dia from outside than from inside and make good your own public record.
Just what value Pornbios have to the "starving girl in Africa who is going to save the world and for whom the Wikipedia is really for", as Jimbo says, I have no idea. To me it all smacks like a hang over from his porno Bomis days. I mean, they don't even inform her of the going daily rates for "actresses" or explain licensing deals and percentages. So what use is that!?!
I see, many of these visual prostitutes also have photos up on Wikimedia commons to remove, see e.g.:
Category:Dominique_Dane.
This post has been edited by Cock-up-over-conspiracy: 
Takin' Out the Trash: My First Two Scalps, My Crusade Against Porn Fan-Boi Spam at Wikipedia
