We can make Wikipedia - ANYTHING WE WANT, it takes a lot of time and effort
Is Wikipedia turning pro-Watchtower?
by cedars 34 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Fernando
Hey Cedars!
I am delighted to read that developments have led you to reconsider giving up on Wikipedia!
You might also be encouraged by what ordinary persons are actually accomplishing in keeping articles there fair, balanced, factual and unbiased.
You might also enjoy this particular topic on propaganda techniques: "unstated assumption".
-
mind blown
Wiki is an "important tool" simply because MANY potential JW (students) as well as JW's and JW family members will read Wiki and believe Wiki, then come to a site like JWN for research.
I use Wiki often to refute JW's because I know "they believe it wouldn't be on Wiki if it wasn't true".
PLEASE someone correct/udate Wiki
-
Miles3
Thanks for the clarification Jeffro. When I investigated a bit why some of the english Wikipedia articles (not the main one about JW, but sub articles) had so few critical information, I remember seing in the pages' history that links were removed, on the ground that the information was on a site from an ex-jw, thus labelled as "opposers" by some Wikipedians.
I do not agree that sites like Barbara Anderson's site or JWFact do not comply with Wikipedia policy. Apart for the personal experiences parts (and even there you'll find non-JW Wikipedia articles where biographical information comes in part from a personnal site or a company's site), their articles are built on cited research and can be checked for accuracy. For example, Barbara Anderson's articles about pedophilia treatment by the WT are backed up by a wealth of court documents, including incriminating letters from WT Legal.
-
Jeffro
I do not agree that sites like Barbara Anderson's site or JWFact do not comply with Wikipedia policy.
They don't.
Apart for the personal experiences parts (and even there you'll find non-JW Wikipedia articles where biographical information comes in part from a personnal site or a company's site), their articles are built on cited research and can be checked for accuracy.
The reason they don't comply is that anyone can put a website together, and anyone can cite anything. To qualify as a reliable source the site itself (not the site's sources) need to meet the relevant criteria of reliability and notability.