Cedars, anyone can create or edit a Wikipedia article. It is an amazing concept, as incorrect information quickly gets removed or tweaked by other people passionate about the topic. If a person does not write in an encyclopaedic manner, another person will adjust the tone of the sentence. Unfortunately, people are overly passionate about religion and are often unable to distinguish between fact and faith.
In the early days of Wikipedia, I wrote a lot of the information about the Watchtower. However, any information that paints the Watchtower in a bad light was quickly re-written, and I got the feeling there is someone in Bethel assigned to monitor the articles. It became too frustrating for me, as endless battles continued with JW's trying to remove information. Eventually I gave up, and a friend of mine spent about a year fixing articles, but he too gave up. There was one other exJW that was very knowledgeable and really owned the project for a long time, but I am not sure who is taking ownership now.
I originally tried to link jwfacts.com, but it was taken down as non-neutral site and non-authoritarian. However, people have linked some articles from jwfacts, such as the page on statistics. A great idea was when Google stopped using links from Wikipedia for calculating its rankings. People were always adding in sites to improve their SEO, and without that motive, sites are now more likely to be relevant to the topics.
The first pillar of Wikipedia is that " Wikipedia is not a soapbox , an advertising platform , a vanity press , an experiment in anarchy or democracy , an indiscriminate collection of information , or a web directory ." It is difficult with religious topics to stop it from becoming a soapbox, and I am impressed that the information regarding the Watchtower is surprisingly neutral. There is a dispute resolution process, and disruptive posters can be banned or articles locked when things get out of hand, such as when a JW continues to delete information without due cause.
Regarding Candice Conti, there is nothing to stop someone from here adding a paragraph to a relevant article, or starting a new page. It would be interesting to see how long it remains for, or how the information gets spun by Witnesses. Whereas JW forums are filled with misinformation regarding the case, on Wikipedia it will not be tolerated to make random accusations as to her motives or guilt.
