Wikipedia Censorship

Burnsy2023 · 8 Dec 2008 at 12:19

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7770456.stm

If you google the pic, it's a bit off IMO, but I really dislike not having the right to view an album cover in a totally non-sexual context.

This is the offending page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Killer

So who can view the page and what are people's views?

Burnsy2023 · 8 Dec 2008 at 13:06

I'd just like to mention that Be* filter it

Burnsy2023 · 9 Dec 2008 at 14:22

So who is going to complain to their ISP? If I have time I'll write a strongly worded email/letter.

Burnsy2023 · 9 Dec 2008 at 15:06

BigglesPiP said:
How english: "That's it! I'm writing a letter about this!"

Ironic as I'm technically German.

I'll add a template when I get time

Burnsy2023 · 9 Dec 2008 at 15:43

Berserker said:
PS - as I've said elsewhere, I don't have a problem with the principle (implementing countermeasures against online child pornography). I do however have a problem with the application in this particular case (censoring the image itself rather than the text would be an improvement, though only a very minor one given the proliferation of other sites showing the image - Amazon included).

I think a message to say the site has been blocked because of illegal material is also important rather than just a 404.

Burnsy2023 · 9 Dec 2008 at 16:11

Lysander said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_pornography

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05/28/government_outlaws_pictures/

That worries me. I think child porno is sick and very wrong, but this will just end up criminalising art. If it's non realistic, then what's the issue? Will writing about it become illegal too?

Wicksta said:
Is that why you don't know the meaning of the word ironic?

I always misuse that word