Wikipedia, the online Encyclopedia, has attempted to profile Newgon, providing a distorted and defamatory description of the Organization:

An online group that advocates for "pedophile rights" and circulates accounts justifying child molestation.

We are often asked if (as a presently active organization) we have pushed for its removal or alteration*. People are sometimes surprised Wikipedia attempts to lend its credibility to these claims. However, Wikipedia's "Pedophile Listicle" (one of many absurd lists) has a chequered history of half-truths and falsehoods.

As documented in our list of hoaxes, the page unleashed two now-proven hoax organizations unto the wilderness. One was named Yahweh, and the other, the Indian National Man Boy Congress Party. These hoaxes were promoted for a cumulative total of over half a decade, demonstrating the lack of scrutiny and editorial oversight that has come to haunt Wikipedia.

Wikipedia's list also deliberately excludes MAP-led organizations that do not lobby for changes to consent laws, including B4U-ACT and Virped. This is done on the false and damaging premise, that so-called "pedophile advocacy" can only go on under the mantra of supporting "Child Sexual Abuse" (CSA).

While Newgon campaigns for the rights of all Minor Attracted and Young People, we have never styled our platform as "Pedophile Rights", and nor do any of Wikipedia's unreliable sources state that we have done so. We are an anti-offending organization that campaigns for rational reform of laws on sexual offending, and for all lived experiences to be listened to.

Ultimately, Wikipedia incorrectly makes truth-claims from the editorial voice of opinion pieces. By Wikipedia's own standards, the sources it uses to support its claims are either not reliable, or do not support the identification of organizations such as JON as supporters of CSA.

To learn more about the history of Minor Attracted People on Wikipedia, the sexual prejudice underpinning the document later expediently revised as a "Child Protection Policy", and Wikipedia's censorship of research into stigmatized topics, please consider reading the NewgonWiki article on Wikipedia Censorship.

*We have witnessed two attempts to provide a less distorted and better sourced description. Both attempts were almost instantly reverted with dubious and accusatory reasoning by a Wikipedia Sysop with a known history of aggressively erasing large volumes of sourced material he personally disagrees with. Therefore, attempting to remove the accusation may not be worthwhile.