Talk:ECPAT: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
Are ECPAT the guys who are backing that nonsensical law against fictional Child-pornography in Sweden? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/80.212.133.159|80.212.133.159]] ([[User talk:80.212.133.159|talk]]) 19:23, 26 July 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
Are ECPAT the guys who are backing that nonsensical law against fictional Child-pornography in Sweden? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/80.212.133.159|80.212.133.159]] ([[User talk:80.212.133.159|talk]]) 19:23, 26 July 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
:Hey, if fictional child pornography became legal then the rate of actual child pornography would drop and they'd have less to rage about and thus would have less importance. Every large organization will eventually become corrupt and try to sustain its importance (which of course translates into funding) by appealing to highly confused people, in this case at the expense of innocent children, artists, and art/pornography viewers/consumers.[[Special:Contributions/76.224.14.76|76.224.14.76]] ([[User talk:76.224.14.76|talk]]) 03:53, 27 July 2010 (UTC) |
:Hey, if fictional child pornography became legal then the rate of actual child pornography would drop and they'd have less to rage about and thus would have less importance. Every large organization will eventually become corrupt and try to sustain its importance (which of course translates into funding) by appealing to highly confused people, in this case at the expense of innocent children, artists, and art/pornography viewers/consumers.[[Special:Contributions/76.224.14.76|76.224.14.76]] ([[User talk:76.224.14.76|talk]]) 03:53, 27 July 2010 (UTC) |
||
::Article by the founder and creator of the Swedish Pirate Party and listed by Time as one of the world's most influential people. http://falkvinge.net/2012/09/07/three-reasons-child-porn-must-be-re-legalized-in-the-coming-decade/ and http://falkvinge.net/2012/09/11/child-porn-laws-arent-as-bad-as-you-think-theyre-much-much-worse/ [[Special:Contributions/68.62.101.204|68.62.101.204]] ([[User talk:68.62.101.204|talk]]) 00:11, 25 February 2013 (UTC) |
|||
== Copyright concerns == |
== Copyright concerns == |
Revision as of 00:11, 25 February 2013
Organizations Unassessed | ||||||||||
|
Reads like an advertisment
With sentences like "ECPAT widened its scope of work to encompass all issues of child sexual exploitation" and "1) working with the private sector to adopt and implement the Code of Conduct for the Protection of Children from Sexual Exploitation in Travel and Tourism" it looks like it was stolen directly from a the press centre of the organisation. At least the ECPAT-USA section needs to be rewritten. Jeltz talk 20:33, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
- == Is this? ==
Are ECPAT the guys who are backing that nonsensical law against fictional Child-pornography in Sweden? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.212.133.159 (talk) 19:23, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
- Hey, if fictional child pornography became legal then the rate of actual child pornography would drop and they'd have less to rage about and thus would have less importance. Every large organization will eventually become corrupt and try to sustain its importance (which of course translates into funding) by appealing to highly confused people, in this case at the expense of innocent children, artists, and art/pornography viewers/consumers.76.224.14.76 (talk) 03:53, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
- Article by the founder and creator of the Swedish Pirate Party and listed by Time as one of the world's most influential people. http://falkvinge.net/2012/09/07/three-reasons-child-porn-must-be-re-legalized-in-the-coming-decade/ and http://falkvinge.net/2012/09/11/child-porn-laws-arent-as-bad-as-you-think-theyre-much-much-worse/ 68.62.101.204 (talk) 00:11, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
Copyright concerns
This one is a right old mess, anyway analysis edit by edit below:
Extended content
|
---|
From that lot what we'd have left is:
|
The second paragraph is no use out of context and anyway refers to one aspect of this orginisations work which leaves us with a very short article. Therefore I feel deletion as a copyvio and restarting as a stub seems most sensible as we have virtually no text we can re-use. Dpmuk (talk) 13:17, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- Have done. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:35, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:35, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Background
Such a big organization and no names are attached to it, as founders etc, or any mentions that most NGO's into sex-trade work here in Thailand has several scandals with staff-members doing exactly what they say they are fighting against - or that ECPAT's background is from the extreme christian movement, trying to outlaw also adult erotica etc? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.11.80.218 (talk) 15:03, 1 October 2012 (UTC)