This is a year 2005 copy of a now-deleted Wikipedia article - the URL:
... now redirects to the article
... within which, much of the material in this article is NOT reproduced.
This article, before being deleted, was being edited by pro- and anti-boylover factions, therefore it contains a curious mish-mash of truth, distortions, and just plain fiction.
It would be very helpful for someone to go back and rebut the distortions and false allegations on a section-by-section basis.
If I only had the time to do it properly... :-(
- Just do it a little at a time, section by section. Maybe create new articles for each topic, and then aggregate info from other sources into those articles. That's what I did at ChildPorn.info. See the list of articles. For example, "Child_pornography's_potential_to_incite_viewers_to_abuse_children" aggregated info from a bunch of different court cases. Leucosticte (talk) 01:08, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
- Step by step, inch by inch (thanks, Moe, for that great line!) Yeah, little by little. Like how life comes to an end... I wonder if I'll make it to this spring...
- Oh, BTW -- I have compiled the past (what - 10 years or so?) "talk" pages for the Wikipedia article "Pedophilia" - the talk pages have a lot of useful information, comments, etc. Now - when will I have time to do something with it? Hoo, boy...
- I'll check your link. When I have time... Thanks... User4 (talk) 04:00, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Edits as of 2-23-15
I cleaned this entry up just a little bit for you and added in the links and references (half of which don't work). It still needs a good deal of loving care before it is ready to be a BoyWiki entry and some of the more provocative jargon should be removed. Still it should be a bit easier for you to edit now. --Etenne (talk) 14:44, 23 February 2015 (UTC)