Forked from The continued march of wiki porn topic with a nice, new eye catching topic
. See: Most viewed pages on the Wikipedia.
QUOTE(White Knight @ Sat 9th January 2010, 11:19pm)
I'm seriously considering sending a letter to my representative conveying my concerns about how Wikipedia doesn't keep sufficient records of the age of the people in the nude photos there, and also my concerns about how easy it is for children to accidentally access pornography on Wikipedia.
As far as I'm aware, Wikipedia hasn't faced any significant legal or governmental challenges as yet.
QUOTE(wikademia.org @ Sat 9th January 2010, 11:39pm)
it seems something like that will have to happen eventually... also maybe the appropriate gov entity will start to examine the early connections between Wikia and Wikipedia.. especially if Wikia has continued "success"
QUOTE(thekohser @ Sun 10th January 2010, 12:28am)
Whitey, it sounds like a job that a collaborative wiki could help facilitate. Why don't you get a coat-rack skeleton of a letter started on Encyc, Wikidemia, Wikipedia Review, or Google Knol, then point us to it, and perhaps we could whip up something really snazzy. The Wikipedia Foundation must be feeling very secure now, what with the latest multi-million dollar rake off tucked away in its war chest, but it is not beyond being challenged and changed.
You know me, I like the idea of letters to Congress.
Personally, I don't count myself amongst the "Destroy the Pee-dia" Brigade. I just think it needs reformed. Extensive reform. I was thinking over the Holiday period about a new pet project for the new year and I thought Wikipedia reform might be an interesting one to take on board. It has been fun to 'vent', in order to put everything into perspective. Now it is time to sit down, sober up, roll up the sleeves and get down to some 'mightier than the sockpuppets' work.
I am glad to read that there are others who feel the same ... and I am sure that there are many, many, many other responsibility individuals within politics, education and child protection who feel even more strongly that we do but just lack the insight, experience and strong enough moral asbestos suits and breathing apparatus in order to enter into the depths of the shitholes that exist on the Wikipedia.
I think we will find that they are better equipped and connected than we are to make things happen.
It really does not take much effort or many resources to start to change public opinion, to have questions asked in government or parliaments, to create a trickle down effect within power and influence.
The Wikipedia: pornography, pedophilia, nationalists and cultists.
I entitled this, "How to knock $1,000,000 holes in the Wikipedia's budget & bring on the heat" because these are where I see best place to focus limited resources;
• the big funding trust (past, present and future) - targeting the trustees and their corporate partners
• responsible agencies (governmental, diplomatic and voluntary sector) - targeting government representatives and director levels
Anyone interested in collaborating should realise that there are many open and revolving doors between such trusts and agencies (the players change positions but take their knowledge and opinions with them and they talk amongst each other
). Efforts will be gradual and cumulative. What is required are modest, patient and persistent efforts in the same direction over time. I think the combined issue of hard core sexual imagery and politics under the cloak of anonymity and the lack of child protection, is the most vulnerable one to target.
I imagine that any letters of concern written can easily be adopted, e.g. pedophilia and bestiality to political conservatives and groups with a duty of care to children, nationalism to the diplomatic sector, cults to religious conservatives.
Personally, on the basis of previous experience, I would not imagine immediate result. Generally, the first response of the responsible individuals within such trusts is to defend their own decision but, if they sniff that the winds of change are blowing in a different direction, you will see fairly rapid changes.
Truth speaks and people hear it.I do not see any point whatsoever in engaging with either the Foundation or the so called community. It is futile. Just aim for the money, and social credibility amongst opinion formers.
In my opinion, outside of the adherents, I actually think most people see the Pee-dia as it is; that it is no longer 'cool' and that it (or becoming a contributor) is a bit of a joke. The trendy uncle getting drunk and dancing at the wedding reception and trying it on with young girls.This post has been edited by Cock-up-over-conspiracy: Sun 10th January 2010, 4:01am