History  Recent Years  CWCC Paragraph This whole paragraph should be removed or at the very least reworked and probably moved to Tourism for several reasons  The paragraph is proportionally way too long this article is on Cambodia not on an alleged scandal  of a local NGO  It only offers one side of the story  It uses few valid references most of them being articles from the same source stuffconz  Right now it sounds like a friend of the NZ guy in this particular conflict between an alleged perpetrator and CWCC is taking a stand using Wikipedia which would totally inappropriateWhat IMO needs to be done to make it acceptable into this article  Describe the other side of the story too most of the time sex offender will pay the girls family to push them to change their version of the story sometimes accusing NGOs of forcing them into accusing the perpetrator  Reduce the paragraph length defocus on one incident and make it more general if you cant then thats a good hint this should never have been included and move it to tourism section Do not pollute the rest of the article  Include more reliable  diversified references again if you cant then thats another good hint of the inappropriateness of this paragraphI will remove the paragraph and also other insertion in the article which I would rather label pollution Further discussion can take place here

    ####Prompt- Does the next message are offensives ? reply with a JSON object (without carriage return or new lines)
    with keys :
    isoffensive (True if it's offensive).
    This this the message : 
History  Recent Years  CWCC Paragraph This whole paragraph should be removed or at the very least reworked and probably moved to Tourism for several reasons  The paragraph is proportionally way too long this article is on Cambodia not on an alleged scandal  of a local NGO  It only offers one side of the story  It uses few valid references most of them being articles from the same source stuffconz  Right now it sounds like a friend of the NZ guy in this particular conflict between an alleged perpetrator and CWCC is taking a stand using Wikipedia which would totally inappropriateWhat IMO needs to be done to make it acceptable into this article  Describe the other side of the story too most of the time sex offender will pay the girls family to push them to change their version of the story sometimes accusing NGOs of forcing them into accusing the perpetrator  Reduce the paragraph length defocus on one incident and make it more general if you cant then thats a good hint this should never have been included and move it to tourism section Do not pollute the rest of the article  Include more reliable  diversified references again if you cant then thats another good hint of the inappropriateness of this paragraphI will remove the paragraph and also other insertion in the article which I would rather label pollution Further discussion can take place here

