I can't confirm the sole purpose of WR as I've only looked at a few diffs [diffs=Wikipedia]. But there have now been several occasions where events there have caused disruption here, and I don't recall anything positive coming out of that site. I'd suggest that any editor who uses both should make a choice between the two. ϢereSpielChequers 23:10, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't want to sound too much like a conspiracy theorist, but is it possible that this notion that the image of flying fish boy "changed" after Ash had the image on his user page has somehow been cooked up with a little trickery?

The inappropriateness of the image lies in it being by von Gloeden, and the associations that come with it, as far as I can tell this particular photo is of the youngest model that WP had a photo of at the time.

A fully clothed image of Traci Lord aged 15 would be just as inappropriate for a prospective director of a educational charity to have sported on their user page.

pushing against the paedophiles before anyon in charge actually started doing anything about it: wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:LGBT_notice_board/Archive_3#what_belongs_here "Deletion of pederasty-related topics is partisan, and you need to re-check the NPOV policy and guidelines before you (Mistress Selina Kyle, I'm looking at you) continue to remove these topics" .... yeeeaahhh. Thanks, 'Dave'

[..]

this reminds me of the "Haiduc" paedophile who I argued wit ha few times before giving up (in the previous links), no one listened to me I saw what they were doing because it's exactly the same kind of slimy stuff PR companies do, it was only later WP actually did anything about the paedophiles pushing it (usually as "pederasty") - wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/block?page=User:Haiduc - and the articles still tainted - I just gave up on WP, they did a few bans for show when they were getting media attention about the networks of pedo users then continued to do nothing...




I just searched up google.com/search?q=site%3Awikipediareview. com+pedophiles+OR+pedophile+OR+paedophile+OR+paedophiles+OR+pedophilia+OR+paedop
hilia:

wikipediareview.com/?showtopic=30094 Commons and Pro-Pedophilia

wikipediareview.com/?showtopic=15438 Boy Scouts are for spanking?, More from Wales talk

wikipediareview.com/?showtopic=34313 Self-identified Pedophile blocks (2007)THAT IS NOT WHAT DON'T ASK DON'T TELL IS MEANT TO BE USED FOR JIMMY. CHRIST. >:|

He is on the Board and steering committee of Wikimedia UK with the purse strings of millions of pounds of Wikimedia's donations in the UK, it could well have been "someone edit that NOW to try protect WMF's reputation" — It's very easy to change a line like that in the database (I'm not sure what database they use but any of them might as well be a giant Excel spreadsheet of text to someone who knows what they are doing, you can change any of the dates to whatever you want if you wish) — Brion VIBBER used to do a lot of requests to change stuff like that back in the day when stuff like user renames were done manually similar to what OTRS do now. It could have just taken a minute or two, if anything it's probably even easier with better tools to edit the database as needed these days. Don't believe everything you see on Wikipedia, this is why stuff like The Internet Archive is important - and even then they sometimes remove stuff due to requests like Wikipedia and Webcitation too... You had the right idea using your own site...

You are focussing on the nakedness, or not, of the image. The image could just of been of the fish and there would still be a problem. The inappropriateness of the image lies in it being by von Gloeden, and the associations that come with it, as far as I can tell this particular photo is of the youngest model that WP had a photo of at the time.

A fully clothed image of Traci Lord aged 15 would be just as inappropriate for a prospective director of a educational charity to have sported on their user page.

Google the photographer, Wilhelm von Gloeden. One of the first links that comes up for me is to nambla.org. WP states that one of his models became his lover at the age of 14. Let's not argue over whether or not that makes him a paedophile.

Van Haeften put the image on their WP user page. They were making a point. They knew that some people would be offended by that particular image of a nude adolescent (more so than, say, an older nude male). I believe they were saying "I can do this. You don't like it. You can't stop me from doing it. Nyah nyah".

nambla.org/GLBvG031c-280.jpg [NSFW - same image as user:Ash/user:Fæ/Ashley Van Haeften had on his userpage]

NewgonWiki exists primarily as a source of information on all adult-minor sexualities and an agent of change
[..]
[second sentence!] At the end of 19th century the most prominent photographer of the male nude was Wilhelm von Gloeden (1856–1931), a boylover himself

a German photographer and boylover

Joshua CIA-P: boylover, girlover stop!
child porn stop! Pedophile pedofilia pornografia infantil
Duncan de Perm, boylover victim. Stop child porn!
[..]
———- Forwarded message ———-
From: David
Date: 2010/1/31
Subject: News from down under
To: joshua
Cc: antipedofilia.org@gmail.com
​Hi joshua,
Here’s some really great news from Asutralia regarding child pornography, and espescially cartoons like “shotakon” and “lolikon”. They’ve also adopted a new law that will make certain *all* the works by artists like von Gloeden, Will McBide and others and all the galleries of Rinrin are illegal!!! Here are the various articles and comments from the paedophiles at Xxxxxxboys.org[..]

My candidate for next year's straight shooter

Balls and integrity.

== December 2010 ==
[[Image:Information.svg|25px|alt=|link=]] [[Wikipedia:Introduction|Welcome]] to Wikipedia. Please be aware of Wikipedia's policy that [[Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons|biographical information about living persons]] must not include [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|unsupported or inaccurate statements]]. Whenever you add possibly controversial statements about a living person to an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did to [[:Harry Hay]], you must include proper [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|sources]]. If you don't know how to [[WP:Citing sources|cite a source]], you may want to read [[Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners]] for guidelines. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-biog1 --> ''To say that Hay was a "a fervid supporter of the North American Man-Boy Love Association" would require rather clearer sourcing. That he may have had controversial political or liberal views on NAMBLA does not mean that he was either a member or an active "boy lover".''

Further note; my comments are based on a partial view of the book you have cited using Google Books - {{citation | last=Timmons | first=Stuart | year=1990 | title=The trouble with Harry Hay: founder of the modern gay movement | publisher=Alyson | isbn=9781555831752 }} - if you believe that your text is a fair representation, please include an associated direct quote from the source material in the citation (try using the quote= parameter using {{tl|citation}}). Obviously any mention of NAMBLA is going to be repeatedly scrutinized for credibility and so for any such material to be retained in an article it will need explicit sourcing. Thanks, [[User:Fæ|Fæ]] ([[User talk:Fæ|talk]]) 22:09, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I see! Well, score one for Van Haeften. Still about seven or eight marks against him, though. And even still, it's kind of pervy to be displaying even a cropped version of that picture on one's User page.

Here's another question: Why is there no File History tab for this page?

This is off-topic, however, I may start another thread on this. "What has Wikipedia Review ever done for us..."?

You may do so if you wish, but I seriously doubt that you can justify WR to him.

I agree, use of Wikipedia should be discouraged by the WMF. Harassment and attacks on members are rife on subforums such as AN/I and RfA. It's a website which Wikipedia and the Wikipedia community seem to have no control over. Don't judge something before looking at it. Wikipedia Review has a positive influence on Wikipedia in many ways... crappy articles are highlighted there and members go over to WP and fix them (often these errors are on BLPs), corruption is exposed and often routed, discussions censored on WP are freely (if sometimes rudely) allowed to progress and develop on WR. It's your safety valve. It keeps the worst monsters from walking your back alleys. →StaniStani 04:41, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

"I haven't seen it [Four Weddings and a Funeral]†, of course, but I've heard that the opening three minutes contains a stream of four letter obscenities"
—Mary Whitehouse
† "Film critic Roger Ebert gave the film three-and-a-half stars out of four, calling it "delightful and sly", and directed with "light-hearted enchantment"

Pp
back in the day ... there even used to be a Wikipedia page where you could type in your own sql script and run it on the database, used mostly for queries and searches and stuff like that. Maybe 2002 or so.

The trouble Fae has is similar to ex-English football captain John Terry. He was filmed on pitch saying "Black c**t" Jwhich was not considered to being used in a down the pub between mates Wikipedian way) to another player. There has been a fuss because he lost the captancy before he was convicted of a crime he has been chrged with. The chattering classes go along with the argument that he has not been convicted , but the fact remains that he does not deny saying the inappropriate things and as capain, he has brought football into disrepute.

Fae is in the same position. Nobody has managed to pin him down explicitly, but he has left a long trail of undesirable actions. The Wikipedian mindset is that they must ignore dubious behaviour until someone is thrown to the dogs. In thereal world, such people get warned about their conduct and if they betray their honorary positions of trust then they tend to lose them.

He also claims on G+ that his "real name" is Fae.

(mod note: "Conflicts of interest, paedophila images" subtitle added)
(mod note: See previous topic, 'Wikimedia UK's Fæ, A new name for an old face', for background)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Fæ.

Should we start a betting pool on how long it stays up and who closes/deletes it?

So I was just looking at what schools this guy has been writing about after I read that he has worked for schools... and... found him covering up (making an edit summary of "vandalism") an account called "Anonyous Whistleblower" posting in gory detail to the article that pupils are warned not to to talk to the Police and that staff open students' bedrooms: wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_School_at_West_Heath?diff=prev&oldid=410341394 (09:56, 27 January 2011) ... and.... he removed this: The vice-principal of Diana, Princess of Wales's former school has admitted possessing indecent photos of children, BBC News, Thursday, 22 April 2010

I looked further into the history and the bit before the bit complaining about staff going into pupil's bedrooms using their key seems to have been posted before the paedophilia incident stuff happened... there's a rather angry rant on the talk page about it: wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_New_School_at_West_Heath#Issues_sectionmccannexposure.wordpress.com/2010/05/31/william-whillock-vice-principal-at-the-new-school-in-west-heath-guilty-of-child-porn-offencesso someone actually posted on Wikipedia warning about paedophile-enabling behaviour at the school about 4 years before it was found out and Wikipedia didn't do anything just covered it up? NONE of the other editors noticed it going on that page for years? Nice... Reminds me of dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1344281/Facebook-suicide-None-Simone-Backs-1-082-online-friends-helped-her.html

Kinda looks like there may be some kind of paedophile ring for years, with the school and allegations repeatedly being removed in the Wikipedia history over years... someone should seriously investigate that omg... Sevenoaks, like London, is a place where there's lots of fat old men with lots of money...