Hmmmm. That WT frames it this way:
"The Writing Department follows the pattern of ‘tracing all things with
accuracy.’ But where can reliable information be found? While the
Internet is a convenient and quick source of vast amounts of
information, our researchers do not rely on blogs or poorly documented
Web entries written by unidentified or unqualified persons. For
example, Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia, warns that
some articles on its own site ‘contain significant misinformation,
unencyclopedic content, or vandalism,’ adding that ‘users need to be
aware of this.’ Thus, the Writing Department looks to standard reference
works, articles written by recognized experts, and books produced by
respected publishers."
How a Wikipedia user frames this point (example here: Wikipedia User):
In every article, links will guide you to associated articles, often
with additional information. You are welcome to add further information,
cross-references, or citations, so long as you do so within Wikipedia's
editing policies and to an appropriate standard. You do not need to
fear accidentally damaging Wikipedia when you add or improve
information, as other editors are always around to advise or correct
obvious errors, if needed, and the Wikipedia encyclopedia software,
known as MediaWiki, is carefully designed to allow easy reversal of
editorial mistakes.
Because Wikipedia is an on-going work to which in principle anybody
can contribute, it differs from a paper-based reference source in some
very important ways. In particular, older articles tend to be more
comprehensive and balanced, while newer articles may still contain
significant misinformation, unencyclopedic content, or vandalism. Users
need to be aware of this in order to obtain valid information and avoid
misinformation which has been recently added and not yet removed. (See
Researching with Wikipedia for more details.) However, unlike a paper
reference source, Wikipedia can be constantly updated, with articles on
topical events being created or updated within minutes or hours, rather
than months or years for printed encyclopedias.
Love the way they leave out the context around newer and older articles. I mean, this can't be because of anti-JW articles surely?
Also interesting to see that the above link is years old (from 2007 if you look at the bottom of the link, not that the WT highlights this) and the newer Wikipedia About main article frames it differently again:
Wikipedia is a live collaboration differing from paper-based reference
sources in important ways. Unlike printed encyclopedias, Wikipedia is
continually created and updated, with articles on historic events
appearing within minutes, rather than months or years. Older articles
tend to be more comprehensive and balanced; newer articles may contain
misinformation and/or unencyclopedic content. Any article may contain
undetected vandalism. Awareness of this helps the reader to obtain valid information and avoid recently added misinformation (see Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia).
I wonder if the Writing Dept helped last year to rank JW's so high in the The 8 religious pages people can’t stop editing
Deary me - it's all so confusing!