On further reflection either number is quite small and perhaps the stat should be expressed in such a way so as to convey the fact the proportion of offenders was small but nonetheless their effect was significant on both the Church and the victims Albatross2147 talk The mention of the sex abuse scandals in the lead has been quite controversial and it has been my position that putting them there at all constitutes WPUNDUE weight but that since most people read more newspapers than books many editors will try to add illformed sentences of dubious accuracy saying something about them in the lead and to prevent that even though it violates WPUNDUE we should put a brilliantly prosaic wellreferenced NPOV sentence there  You are welcome of course to contribute but any change in the lead should probably be mentioned on the talk page  It might also help to know that the RCC article recently went through a very contentious FA review which it failed so there are a number of editors who know the article pretty well right now and might be able to help address your concerns adequately   

    ####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 : 
On further reflection either number is quite small and perhaps the stat should be expressed in such a way so as to convey the fact the proportion of offenders was small but nonetheless their effect was significant on both the Church and the victims Albatross2147 talk The mention of the sex abuse scandals in the lead has been quite controversial and it has been my position that putting them there at all constitutes WPUNDUE weight but that since most people read more newspapers than books many editors will try to add illformed sentences of dubious accuracy saying something about them in the lead and to prevent that even though it violates WPUNDUE we should put a brilliantly prosaic wellreferenced NPOV sentence there  You are welcome of course to contribute but any change in the lead should probably be mentioned on the talk page  It might also help to know that the RCC article recently went through a very contentious FA review which it failed so there are a number of editors who know the article pretty well right now and might be able to help address your concerns adequately   

