Talk:UK/VIPaedophile

As the one with sole current responsibility in law for the content of this site, I am not happy with the presentation of this page:

• At minimum and as a matter of urgency, the origin, status and full membership of the 'court' which reached the verdicts shown needs to be prominently explained (at present it does not even have a WS page!). As it stands, a casual reader is likely to falsely conclude that a court with the status and enforcement backing of a UN member state reached the verdicts shown.
• The use of Acknowledged and Alleged in this manner with no reference to who/what has done the acknowledging or alleging. The idea is sound but it probably needs implementing by way of a template with accompanying full explanation of its parameters.

I have considerable sympathy with Kevin Annett and his work but I am not prepared to put either myself or this site at what I judge to be serious legal risk over content presented in this unqualified and hence misleading manner.

I do not have the time to do this mayself right now so, please edit it in accordance with the above concerns as a matter of urgency --Peter (talk) 07:50, 5 January 2020 (UTC)