Wikipedia blocked by UK ISPs, For "potentially illegal indecent image" Options Rating

[Alex]

Surprised no one has brought this up here, but apparently users of major UK ISPs are all being assigned one of three IP addresses. See the discussion and bugzilla for the drama.

[Milton Roe]

Surprised no one has brought this up here, but apparently users of major UK ISPs are all being assigned one of three IP addresses. See the discussion and bugzilla for the drama.

Alright. Looks like Brion has taken up the issue at Bugzilla. Hopefully we can get this problem resolved, as NEITHER of the outcomes (allowing rampant vandalism from these IPs or blocking millions of quality users) we have availible seems to be working right now. And for the record, I liked my title better (Island of Great Britain reduced to 2 IP addresses. Chaos Ensues.) to be much more attention grabbing. Whoever changed it to this bland title is a buzzkill --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:44, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

This is where the chickens come home to roost for allowing IP editing. Once they've blocked the IP range, they can't go back to enable only registered users from there, as no new registrations are permitted.

My heart is bleeding for them, in this terrible dilemma. All of the UK now looks to Wikipedia like a couple of computers in a junior high school library. Now what?

Help, Jimbo! Two of your non-negotiable policies are non-negotiably conflicticating!

[Krimpet]

Nobody tell Mr. Baxter.

[The Joy]

YAAAAAY! That means David Gerard is blocked forever!

Ding dong
The Gerard's gone!
Which Gerard?
David Gerard!
Ding dong
The wicked Gerard's blocked!

[Basil]

It seems that the problem has been caused by Wikipedia acting as a host of child porn or other unsavory material.

Diff

Actually, this is where UK users of certain ISPs (at least UK Online) get proxied trough when a site has been flagged by the UK Internet Watch Foundation http://www.iwf.org.uk ... It seems wikipedia got flagged for childpornography. The other IP addresses might be the filters of other ISPs.

[EricBarbour]

It seems that the problem has been caused by Wikipedia acting as a host of child porn or other unsavory material.
Diff

Eeeexcellent. Ya made my day.

[Sylar]

YAAAAAY! That means David Gerard is blocked forever!

Ding dong
The Gerard's gone!
Which Gerard?
David Gerard!
Ding dong
The wicked Gerard's blocked!

Aren't all admins IP-block exempt?

[The Wales Hunter]

So Wikipedia has been flagged in the UK as a child pornography site? I'm not entirely surprised - the presence of the Virgin Killer image was always going to do it eventually, surely?

[Basil]

The UK police are now likely to take an interest in those who edit and attempt to normalise the practices described in certain articles, and will no doubt be visiting some wikipedians to peruse their hard drives and media collections. Not before time either.

[Selina]

Woooo! I and I think some others complained about the paedophiles using "pederasty" as a shield for activities ages ago

[The Wales Hunter]

So Wikipedia has been flagged in the UK as a child pornography site? I'm not entirely surprised - the presence of the Virgin Killer image was always going to do it eventually, surely?

A post on [[WP:AN]] appears to confirm that, to an extent:

This is most likely down to the UK's bullshit ISP censorship. I am currently connected to Wikipedia via the shared 62.30.249.131 IP address, this is a proxy as my router shows that it is not my actual IP. I can confirm that I cannot access the Virgin Killer page at all, nor can I access Image:Virgin_Killer.jpg.

[Selina]

what is the image? if Wikipedia is hosting child porn, isn't that illegal in the US also??

[CrazyGameOfPoker]

what is the image? if Wikipedia is hosting child porn, isn't that illegal in the US also??

It's an album by the Scorpions.

The cover is a little girl, nude, but with any bits covered by a faux-broken glass effect.

To be honest, it may be constred as pornographic to some, as she's in a sexual pose.

This post has been edited by CrazyGameOfPoker: Sat 6th December 2008, 3:36pm

[The Wales Hunter]

what is the image? if Wikipedia is hosting child porn, isn't that illegal in the US also??

It's an album by the Scorpions.

The cover is a little girl, nude, but with any bits covered by a faux-broken glass effect.

To be honest, it may be constred as pornographic to some, as she's in a sexual pose.

Agreed, but the thing now is that this situation will give the leftie-community even more reason to keep the image!

[Cedric]

If UK authorities are bringing the crackdown on WP, I suspect it is not for image hosting, but rather for providing a friendly space for otherwise promoting pedophilia. A harder case to make, I think, but by no means impossible.

This is the kind of thing that the "ZOMG!! CENSORSHIP!!!" attitude can give rise to. Given the head-up-the-ass culture that pervades WP, they have not a hope of understanding the distinction between real censorship and entirely appropriate self-regulation and self-restraint.

[The Wales Hunter]

Well, it's now on Jimbo's talk page, so it'll be interesting to see what happens next...

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=256253623

Huh. That's interesting. Not sure I understand it yet. Could someone give me an NPOV summary?--Jimbo Wales (talk) 17:08, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

[Robert Roberts]

If UK authorities are bringing the crackdown on WP, I suspect it is not for image hosting, but rather for providing a friendly space for otherwise promoting pedophilia. A harder case to make, I think, but by no means impossible.

This is the kind of thing that the "ZOMG!! CENSORSHIP!!!" attitude can give rise to. Given the head-up-the-ass culture that pervades WP, they have not a hope of understanding the distinction between real censorship and entirely appropriate self-regulation and self-restraint.

It's nothing to do with UK "authorities" just that the ISPs all rely on a certain "independent" charity to say to them "this is child porn" and then they block it. All you need to do is report the same site to them enough time and they'd add it to the list. The pedophila articles are neither here nor there in regards to this issue.

[The Wales Hunter]

Agreed, but the thing now is that this situation will give the leftie-community even more reason to keep the image!

Too predictable

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=255943851

This user is vehemently against the Internet Watch Foundation's censorship of the article for the Scorpions album Virgin Killer. Sceptre (talk) 17:31, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Only on Wikipedia could a blocked minor add such a notice!

[Robert Roberts]

The UK police are now likely to take an interest in those who edit and attempt to normalise the practices described in certain articles, and will no doubt be visiting some wikipedians to peruse their hard drives and media collections. Not before time either.

Fantasy I'm afraid, UK police forces are busy dealing with people exchanging pictures of them raping children or paying via credit card (someone paying for child porn is fantastical evidence for the police) for pictures of people raping children. The sort of discussion you get on wikipedia wouldn't be of much interest to them - swamping as they are with trying to get actual abusers. It's just another way in which people overestimate the actual importance of wikipedia in the scheme of things.

EDIT: I see my IP is one of the affected ones - I can't get to those pages.

This post has been edited by Robert Roberts: Sat 6th December 2008, 5:42pm

[Sceptre]

What I find weird is that I can't access Virgin Killer, but I can access Blind Faith, Nevermind, and Houses of the Holy