Talk:Sexual abuse: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
http://web.archive.org/web/20081219084433/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse | http://web.archive.org/web/20081219084433/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse | ||
:That's not unusual. "High-level" articles often go neglected. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 11:13, 28 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 11:13, 28 February 2015
I just want to say how amazed I was to see such an important article so seriously neglected. I have added a bit, but it still needs a lot of work. User4 (talk) 08:13, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Here are some articles (made before the "great pedo pogram/purge" was instituted) with a little better information, but still containing some serious errors:
http://web.archive.org/web/20050106091844/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse
http://web.archive.org/web/20070810173316/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse
http://web.archive.org/web/20070214034307/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse
http://web.archive.org/web/20071228105122/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse
This one is (I believe) after the pedo purge:
http://web.archive.org/web/20081219084433/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse
- That's not unusual. "High-level" articles often go neglected. Leucosticte (talk) 11:13, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
