Wikipedia is obsessed with penis, free erect penis pictures for everyone to see!

It seems that wikipedia has a fascination with penis! yes, that is right. It is really free pornography for everyone! There is no age requirement, as long as the kids know how to type the word penis on that page, they will be able to see plenty of real life pictures of penis soft and erect! Can you imagine if those pictures were shown on TV or magazines, or textbooks, angry parents will certainly file plenty of lawsuits against whoever did that. But on wikipedia, it is open for early sex education.

Not so long ago, it even had a real picture a elephant penis! You sure can’t find that anywhere else.

Thanks to the wonderful free donors, the penis page has had plenty of free pornography pictures.

They seem to constantly update those free porn pictures almost weekly. Parents, don’t worry, wikipedia is claimed be kid-safe, what your kids can’t find on those locked sites, they can find plenty on wikipedia. I am sure that those very dedicated OCD administrators have spent a lot of time on choosing which penis pictures to be published, which erected penis pictures will be more approriate for the children. There are plenty of penis pictures, just click on history and find more. Here are some sample pictures for the whole world to see.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Penis&oldid=190018404
Two new fully erected penis pictures

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Penis&oldid=164889591
Three different fully erected real penis pictures, plus one penis with piercing

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Penis&oldid=136875061
Two different penis pictures in color, and same black and white penis picture

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Penis&oldid=123112225
One picture of a penis soft and erect, black and white penis picture, and a ampallang pierced penis (somehow, this picture didn’t last long.)

You can also find plenty free porn pictures on other related subjects, such as vagina.

Free porns by anyone, and for everyone, that is the essence of wikipedia!

The fundamental serious problem of wikipedia – Banned for lifetime.

It is quite common that someone who only wants to contribute some valuable information on wikipedia, accidently s/he pissed off one of the OCD administrators. That person is banned for lifetime.

Are those banned editors “criminals?” Did they kill someone, or are they the internet terrorists? What did they do that deserve a lifetime ban?

Once that person is banned, anything s/he edits will be be reverted by those wikipedia OCD administrators. And that is the fundamental problem of wikipedia. Because there are just way too many OCD patients working for wikipedia who have nothing else better to do, those nerdy no-life losers spend their lifetime on reverting banned editors’ edited articles, even if they are reverting back to the vandalized page.

Here is the perfect example, what those OCD patients are doing for wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Penwhale&oldid=106705031#Hey.2C_thanks_for_reporting_me_ASSHOLE.21.21.21

They don’t care what the banned users did, they just want to revert, revert. And wikipedia foundation encourages such abusive behavior. It also gives those people a sense of power which they don’t have in real life. Further, it makes them feel good because they can’t control anyone in real life, at least they are happy that they can just abuse anyone that they dislike on wikipedia. And that is the reason why they are diagnosed as patients of obsessive-compulsive disorders.

If wikipedia doesn’t change that stupid rule, wikipedia is simply creating more and more people with wikipedia addiction and wikipedia generated OCD.

In real life, if someone committed a murder, s/he has to go through trials; and if s/he doesn’t agree with the judge, s/he can still go for another trial at a higher court. On wikipedia, once a person is banned by any of those OCD administrators, the person is banned for life. There is no trial, nothing. That creates lots of problems, because how can we be sure the banned user was actually “vandalizing” pages? How can we be sure that those OCD administrators actually did the right thing? There is no check and balance inside wikipedia, those OCD patients basically just bound with each other. To those idiots, they think that the world only has two kinds of people, the wikipedia administrators and those banned editors of wikipedia.

Lots of those OCD administrators are spending their time pissing people off by reverting, and they spend way too much time on studying if one of the editors is a banned editor. It gets them excited to know that a banned user is back. That is the reason why there are so many pages on wikipedia full of “criminal” names, those OCD patients are constantly adding more information about any “vandals” recent activities.

wikipedia idiots need to stop this stupid rule of banning people for lifetime, because most people were banned for the wrong reason. And even those real life criminals are given second chances once they are released from the jail. Further, many banned editors are actually well educated, and they are only trying to contribute their own knowledge. For people who have a life, they don’t have time to be wikipedia administrators, they only have time to edit a few articles once in a while.

On the other hand, many of those OCD administrators are the ones who need to be banned for lifetime, because they have no life other than wikipedia!

wikipedia wants you to look at people’s pubic hair pictures!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pubic_hair

ya, do you know what “pubic hair” means? well, don’t worry, just click on that link, you will understand the meaning of pubic hair! And if you can’t understand it, you can look at those free real pubic hair pictures, including a black male and a white female’s uncovered NAKED genital pictures shown their pubic hair.

yea, parents, don’t worry about your little children reading articles on wikipedia, wikipedia is children friendly, anyone can read that pubic hair article with no problem at all.

wikipedia, the free porn site, free for all!

wikipedia is indeed a free and popular pornographic encyclopedia

wikipedia is indeed an free pornographic encyclopedia, it has so many biographies of many porn stars, it even have an article on “pornographic actor”, the history, actors, pay rates, etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pornographic_actress

Yea, parents, if you want your children to be a porn star, wikipedia is the good place to start, it is free, and your children can browse all the dirty porno information even in the local libriries through wikipedia.

so there is no need to worry if your children are using wikipedia at all, wikipedia is safe for little children, free porno information for everyone.

here is one example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christy_Canyon

a pornography actress

wikipedia is a good source for free pornography, there is no age limit, children are welcome

a while ago, i told you that wikipedia has lots of penis pictures. of course, i have to check out their vagina article. apprently, a lot of “active” editors really like to edit this article, so those OCD administrators decided to lock that article, so regular people can only read, but can’t edit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vagina

anway, most real encyclopedia will only have a hand drawn picture of the vagina, but wikipedia actually has a real big size vagina picture named with scientific names. thanks to that annoymous woman who decided to expose her most private part for the whole world to see. Not only that, since wikipedia is a free site, any kids who know how to spell the word pussy vagina, who know how to use a mouse, can read that article even in their own school library.

yea, how many kids or teenagers will actually look at that article because they want to find out some scientific facts about vagina? I doubt that

Not only that, be sure to check the article for mons pubis, it has a side view real life colored picture of a female’s vagina, we don’t know if that is from the same “brave” woman or not. you can see the public hair on the vagina distinctively

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mons_pubis

Then be sure to check out the “cleft” picture, a shaved vagina, hey, who doesn’t like variety. I am sure that any parents will be happy to know that their teenage sons are studying the online encyclopedia, and they will be happy know that their sons will know the difference between a shaved and un-shaved vagina

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Cleft.jpg

Even if parents block some pornography sites on the internet, now their sons and daughters can look at free pornography pictures on the so-called online “encyclopedia” where anyone can submit their vagina and penis, who knows what else perverts have submitted pictures and be “worshiped” by fans across the world, how great is that?

Movie theaters check IDs if someone wants to watch a R rated movie. When teenagers turn on TV without adult channels, will they ever be able to see a naked penis or a vagina picture? No, never. Thanks to free wikipedia, teens, boys and girls don’t have to show their IDs if they just want to look at dirty pics on wikipedia. And please, don’t tell us that those pics are merely “erotic”, or just for scientific reasons. And you know it very well, what horny teenagers do when they get online, sex is always on their mind. A naked picture is a dirty picture, they don’t care to read “articles” on wikipedia, they just want to find out more and more free dirty pics. And did you also know that wikipedia has tons of articles about all kinds of porn stars, straight, gay, just enter the porn star’s name, you are almost guaranteed to find the article.

Even for those who don’t have Internet at home, they can just go to any local libraries and check out free porns on wikipedia. It is just that easy!

Thanks to wikipedia, now all the horny teenagers can have a free, uncensored free pornography site.

PS: some think that those dirty pictures are not “pornography”. well, can you find any of those pictures in any non-pornography magzines or newspapers? Can you ask your local TV stations to show any of those pictures even after midnight? Can you ask your local high schools to post any of those pictures on campus, or use those pictures as sex education materials?!

I don’t think so.