Proof that the WT has edited the WIKIPEDIA page on JW's? (page 3)

freeme

thats quiet interesting... but since it doesnt indicate huge efforts to make the wikipedia article the way they like it its nothing to be exciting about.

with the other edits the guy made it maybe a single person who thought the links and the books which are for overseers and elders only shouldnt be listed there. thats all. when you do something at work in the internet it doesnt mean the COMPANY you're working for gave you instructions to do that.

this books arent for the public eye and all witnesses know that. its the burden the elders/overseers have to carry. thats the way they see it.

RollerDave

Yeah, but Wikipedia is supposed to be non-biased, and deleting the links that lead to reexamine.org shows a pro-WTS bias on the part of the editor.

Not cool.

RD

R6Laser

I don't think there will ever be a non-biased JW entry on Wikipedia without either side complaining about it. On one side the JWs will complain that there are people just trying to put in negative information, while the non-JWs will be complaining that there are changes made to only point the positive side.

KW13

http://digg.com/offbeat_news/Latest_Group_caught_out_by_Wikiscanner

Register on digg.com and then click the link that says Digg below the number. The more diggs it gets, the more people read it.

jwfacts

I would love to know about the poster achtung_heiss at answers.yahoo.com

He answers every single question about JWs in great depth. I am sure he must be located in Bethel, but am not sure how to track his IP.

freeme

achtung_heiss

means "attention_hot"

KW13

wow cool lol

Burger Time

I agree with RG....it's never going to be unbiased.....unless a non biased person was writing it. Since there is no way to confirm if the source has nothing to do with either side you can never call it unbiased....thus why Wikipedia while it has lots of positives will NEVER replace a real credited Encyclopedia....and who is to say a unbiased source would actually put those book in?

cultswatter

The way I see it WIKIPEDIA is the new tool to use against the WTS. Wait till i do a blog about Pascal Petit on page 93!!!

still_in74

wikipedia was how I got started examining. It seemed harmless, possibly unbiased, lets see if JW's are on here? Oh they are, hmmmm........ interesting, maybe I'll follow this link to see what they say about CT Russell....... uhha..... yup.... okay...... O my! ...... are they serious??....... etc. etc.

Proof that the WT has edited the WIKIPEDIA page on JW's?

Share this