::(edit conflict... it's also not something to be resolved with "open letters" on Wikipedia talk pages)  I don't get it.  Sanger's seemingly willful refusal to understand American child porn laws, and the flamboyantly demonstrative, alarmist way of going about complaining, are too convenient a fit with his other protests that Jimbo and the rest of Wikipedia are on the wrong track.  Although the substance of his ostensible gripe this time looks like something on the losing side of a 1950s free speech/censorship incident  complaining about widely available 100-year-old mainstream images  it's not the content of his soap boxing per se but rather the fact that he is using Wikipedia as a soapbox and then making a publicity stunt out of it.  If he wishes to call a legal complaint, however misguided, to the attention of the appropriate officials he either has or can google contact information for Mike Godwin and the local court house.  Going straight to the press with this, and posting open letters on assorted Wikipedia pages, are achieve only attention, not resolution.  All the same, is there any reason why we can't just ignore it and archive or delete it if he posts anything inappropriate?  Is he causing any active disruption here that needs to be stopped?  -