Talk:Operation Cathedral

Some sources with useful information

• http://edition.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/UK/02/13/england.pornography/index.html
• http://edition.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/UK/02/13/england.pornography.02/index.html
• http://edition.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/UK/02/13/paedophile.police/index.html
• http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2001/feb/11/tracymcveigh.martinbright
• http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-75326837.html
• http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1169457.stm
• http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1167879.stm
• http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/pm/1168515.stm
  
• http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1165372.stm
• http://www.telegraph.co.uk/connected/main.jhtml?xml=/connected/2001/02/15/ecnpaed115.xml

John Nevard (talk) 16:39, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I have edited the mainpage, and this list, and have now struck out the links that are currently used in the article. Thanks. JabberJaw (talk) 05:02, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Operation Cathedral. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050124031648/http://mccain.senate.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=Newscenter.ViewPressRelease&Content_id=863 to http://mccain.senate.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=Newscenter.ViewPressRelease&Content_id=863

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:20, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Operation Cathedral. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040819105555/http://www.pressherald.mainetoday.com/specialrpts/danger/club.htm to http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/specialrpts/danger/club.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:40, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Risks to Relatives

This section is a bit of a non sequitur, and since it provides no cited source material, I suspect it reflects conclusions reached through original research, in violation of the no original research policy. Matuko (talk) 22:17, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Yes. It seems misplaced. I have moved it here for relevant discussion. JabberJaw (talk) 22:17, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

“Due to the lack of a proper legal framework, what has now become computer law, judges and lawyers in a few countries were unsure on how to interpret facts related to computers and the Internet. Because of the publicity the operation received, full names and addresses were almost always divulged to the media thus exposing direct relatives (wives and children) to potential danger from vigilante types among the general public. In Belgium in particular, the Police Judiciare had come under heavy criticism for the handling of the Marc Dutroux case in 1995. The efforts to restore a more positive image and the moral aspect behind the operation led officers to hold a certain disregard for relatives and even consider them as potential accomplices.”

Yes, non sequitur. Let us keep it out. Zezen (talk) 08:02, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Excessive Citations

The 15 citations clustered after the first paragraph need to be cleaned up and/or distributed more evenly in the article. Someone has made a valiant attempt to incorporate a suggestion but has gone a bit overboard with it. If no one objects, I'd like to tackle this myself later. Matuko (talk) 23:54, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

With my recent edits, these have now been integrated. Thanks. JabberJaw (talk) 05:29, 23 June 2019 (UTC)