Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce/Witch-Hunt
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Witch-hunt
I think this page needs more information about The Great Witch Hunt and its time period. I might add some stuff this weekend but im sorta busy right now, so im marking it. Phinnaeus (talk) 16:19, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
Added to User:Bananagirl/Desk RJFJR 03:48, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
Cleanup progressing. More?
Added to User:Sceptre/Desk RJFJR 17:17, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
an interesting phenomenon is occuring within wikipedia, most visible in the 'witchhunt' talk page. the attempt to rewrite the meaning of the term 'witchhunt' to give it a sense of 'common understanding' that it describes 'moral hysteria', and then, errors in the execution of legal matters. I have noticed a subscriber going about and planting 'witchhunt' phrases in many texts on wikipedia. Their work concentrates on the Kenja Communication Group, and there they begin using the phrase. But it has been injected by them into many pages where injustice and error has been made. They are linking up historical injustices with their predicament by secreting this phrase into various sections with relevance. they seem to want to expand the meaning of 'witchhunt' to include "accusations of pedophilia". they are fast tracking the 'uptake' of their idea by publishing it on this site, and will then be downloading and tendering it to various proffesionals and academics as fact, further intensifying the meaning. The following link has been secreted as well. http://www.misuseofchildmolestationcharges.info/Web_Links-req-viewlink-cid-2.phtml this is described as an independant report but the author is a known member of the group, Kenja Communication. She has frequented the groups social activities, and worked for the group in their previous court cases.
this is a new and unforseen development within wikipedia, and I think we should be concerned that such a large scale misrepresentation can be engineered on this site.
at its most innocent, this amounts to a fraud. But it is also verging on criminal activity as the perpertators are knowingly interfering with facts to later recall them as 'evidence', to support their claims.
they hope there will seem to be a universal agreement that the term 'witchhunt' includes their predicament.
the same subscriber seems to be asking for Mr Ken Dyers, the leader of the group, to be excluded from the 'list of indicted religous and spiritual leaders' by innocuously suggesting he shouldn't be grouped in with 'murderers and rapists'. However, this trivialises the 22 charges of aggravated sexuall molestation which Mr Dyers is charged with.
something is not quite right with all of this.Legalist 10:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
For your information:this is a sample of text from this subscriber;
'Kenja has also been used as a case study in an independant report on modern witchhunts, cited as an example of how false child molestation charges, and the hysteria that surrounds them, can be used for personal gain.[1], (however, the author has long been associated with the group, both professionaly, and socially.Even the title suggests an absence of objectivity).
and sites visited by the subscriber;
• • 07:40, 25 October 2006 (hist) (diff) m McMartin preschool trial • 07:32, 25 October 2006 (hist) (diff) m Witch-hunt • 07:22, 25 October 2006 (hist) (diff) McMartin preschool trial • 07:20, 25 October 2006 (hist) (diff) m Tasmanian Aborigines • 07:17, 25 October 2006 (hist) (diff) m Outreau trial (extra link) • 08:13, 24 October 2006 (hist) (diff) Talk:List of convicted or indicted religious leaders (top) • 08:11, 24 October 2006 (hist) (diff) Talk:List of convicted or indicted religious leaders • 08:09, 24 October 2006 (hist) (diff) List of convicted or indicted religious leaders • 07:59, 24 October 2006 (hist) (diff) Kenja • 07:55, 24 October 2006 (hist) (diff) Kenja Communication (still need to add references... please bear with me!) • 06:06, 5 October 2006 (hist) (diff) m Buddhism • 06:02, 5 October 2006 (hist) (diff) Kenja (more neutral) • 05:58, 5 October 2006 (hist) (diff) m Kenja • 05:54, 5 October 2006 (hist) (diff) Outreau trial (start of clean up) • 05:43, 5 October 2006 (hist) (diff) m Kenja Communication (more neutral) • 04:42, 21 September 2006 (hist) (diff) m Outreau trial (grammar) • 05:02, 8 September 2006 (hist) (diff) Talk:Outreau trial (Clean up) (top) • 04:59, 8 September 2006 (hist) (diff) Talk:Witch-hunt • 00:40, 4 September 2006 (hist) (diff) m Gwen Harwood • 00:39, 4 September 2006 (hist) (diff) m Gwen Harwood (edit) • 00:32, 4 September 2006 (hist) (diff) m Canberra (clarification) • 00:23, 4 September 2006 (hist) (diff) m Gilbert and Sullivan (edit) • 00:07, 4 September 2006 (hist) (diff) m Pluto (edit) • 04:59, 1 September 2006 (hist) (diff) Shrek • 04:57, 1 September 2006 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Introduction
it is consistent with molestors of children to accuse them of lying, or fantasising, or to try and describe allegations against them as a conspiracy, there is nothing new here. However, the publication of hoax reports by psuedo academics brings with it a chilling aspect which deserves to be aired.The target of the report are young women who have blown the whistle, and whose allegations have been investigated by the police. In any investigation of this nature, the young women have to sign a statement to the effect they are telling the truth, and this makes them liable. the devious nature of this publication, begining with it's title and claims of objectivity and including it's devious secretion into wikipedia articles leads me to be suspicous of the objectives surrounding it's publication. We are witnessing a truly sadistic act through the invention of such a report, and sources tell us the information from this report has been current in the Kenja Group for some time, and coincedentially forms the basis of thier defence campaign. [[[User:Legalist|Legalist]] 00:21, 7 May 2007 (UTC)] [[1]]
I just want to point out that while unlike the midieval witch trials, the child molestation crisis does, according to our current understanding, carry real and substantiative consequences for victims; I think that in the pursuit of intellectual honesty, it behooves us to recognize that both share one defining characteristic: in public eyes the accused are guilty without question and without recourse. This, even with no other concerns, should give us pause before accusations are leveled, and also cause us some measure of trepidation when persuing with such a serious matter entailing such real consequences. In the end, like the OJ simpson trial, the accused will remain guilty as charged regardless of the courts verdict, unless someone else is brought in as the real perpatrator; as such it fully qualifies as a moral panic. the only difference is that here, the costs of erring on the side of the accused are very grave. I have heard of a couple of incidents where the accusation was certainly spurious, although it was taken as fact by many of those who listened. (Infact, in this instance, the accused was actualy helping the person in question, who happened to have been stumbling around in the dark drunk after a party, get home safely.) 74.138.74.94 (talk) 18:12, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
I've cleaned it up, merging witchcraft trial, but leaving a {{split}} notice suggesting a new article dealing with the "Great" Early Modern witchhunt in particular. dab (𒁳) 10:35, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
This in reference to the References 45 and 47. Both articles refer to tribals, therefore cannot be attributed to label the country as still engaging in witch hunt. They can be added as isolated incidents.cyberwizmj 14:45, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
