it's possible that that deleted list is not 100% journals that LJ-abuse deleted
It's possible. Though given the source of the list, it's certain that all of the listed journals and comms were those reported by WFI as "pedophile" journals. Given the inconsistent way in which LJ implemented its purge (despite what they say, it couldn't have been interest-based, as many LJs with the trigger keywords remained active) it's extremely likely that the list is accurate.
no subject
It's possible. Though given the source of the list, it's certain that all of the listed journals and comms were those reported by WFI as "pedophile" journals. Given the inconsistent way in which LJ implemented its purge (despite what they say, it couldn't have been interest-based, as many LJs with the trigger keywords remained active) it's extremely likely that the list is accurate.