WTF? Tried Jehovahs Witnesses to delete Raymond from Wikipeda a couple minutes ago?

by Dold Agenda 144 Replies latest jw friends

  • punkofnice

    Twat apologist blocked for making 'legal' threats. Wahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Prescious!

  • mrsjones5

    A message from Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York

    Dear user, Thank you for communicating with us.We apologize if there was any error in our judgement when editing the page about Raymond Franz.We read Wikipedia's policies thoroughly and realised that some information presented on the page was incorrect and presented a completely different view of how our society's representatives deal with matters regarding apostasy,especially in the case of Raymond Franz. With a case like this,it is advisable to ask a representative of our organization about the matter.If nobody you contact knows about this and you start researching using the internet,you are not going to receive 100% factual sources.So if you do not have many facts,please do not publish information like this on a well-researched online encyclopedia.It can give this website a bad reputation.You did nothing wrong to restore the page to normal.That is your job as a Wikipedia editor.But we must bring this to your attention:The information on the page needs to be re-edited to provide satisfactory factual and unbiased information.If no such information can be found,it is our request as a legal coorporation that you remove the page and use the information on a website that is not an online encyclopedia.
    Jehovah’s Witnesses
    Contact us:
    25 Columbia Heights
    BROOKLYN NY 11201-2483
    +1 718-560-5000 — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:10, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

    You are talking about this edit. You deleted a large portion of the article without mentioning anything in edit summary. Furthermore, 1) there were numerous formatting errors, 2) you removed categories and interwikis, persondata, defaultsort.
    If you think something is wrong in the article, you can discuss too! --Tito Dutta (talk) 18:19, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
    • Hello, IP. I understand and appreciate your concern regarding the article and we would certainly appreciate your assistance towards improving it. However, so as not to get off on the wrong foot, there are a few things you should be aware of:
    1) We take threats of legal action quite seriously. If you do make such a threat, you will be blocked from editing until the threat is withdrawn or the case is resolved. I understand that you did not make such a threat above, but language such as "legal corporation" tells me that you're not an attorney and might make such a threat inadvertently. The corporate status of JW carries no weight here.
    2) While it is possible to edit wikipedia without an account, doing so both reveals information that you may want to keep private (your IP address, which is correlated with your geographic location) and is seen by many editors as a "second-class citizen". I encourage you to create an account and, if you have an official position in the JW and wish to edit articles relating to JW, "declare your interest" and ask for assistance in editing. Conflicts of interest are taken seriously here. WP:COI has the details of how to handle this.
    3) Perhaps most important, please understand that we do not aim for "100% factual sources". The goal of wikipedia is to be a neutral summary of secondary and tertiary sources; where those sources are wrong, wikipedia will be wrong as well. This is by design.
    4) It's very common that new editor who arrive wanting to make specific changes to a specific article find themselves frustrated by a seemingly endless stream of policies and customs. While I admire your zeal, you will be a much more effective editor if you don'tinitially edit articles you feel passionately about. Making a hundred small changes over the course of a month (and watching how the community reacts to those changes) will give you a better sense of what works and what doesn't. Reading the talk pages of articles, dropping in a the WP:Teahouse and even watching the drama at WP:ANI will let you learn from other people's mistakes.
    5) Don't be afraid to ask questions. You can do so here or at my talk page, or better yet at the WP:Teahouse.
    Looking forward to your contributions,
  • breakfast of champions
    breakfast of champions

    ^^^Is that for real???

    Wow. This is really where they want to go with this? They're just going to try to control information all over the planet?

    It must be the truth!

    Doesn't even seem real. Wow.

  • mrsjones5

    Yep, it's real. At least the entry is real. I don't know if the fellow is really from the tower or just a wannabee.

  • breakfast of champions
    breakfast of champions

    I'm seeing that now, thanks for posting this. Amazing.

    I honestly didn't think they would sink this low.

    They did, and the great thing is now there's public record of them trying to conceal information, not just behind closed doors in their "writing comittee"

    If this guy isn't really WT, he could get into some hot water throwing legal bullshit around like that.

  • jgnat

    I vote for second class wannabe.

  • 00DAD

    I bet it's just some anonymous JW pretending to be a White Knight for their precious corporate God.

    It doesn't quite have the ring of anything that would ever come out of Brooklyn.

    For starters, the phrase, " We apologize if there was any error in our judgement when editing ..., " is completely uncharacteristic of the WTBTS and its minions. Since when does the WTBTS ever apologize or admit to errors in judgement about anything? Never.

    If they wrote it, it'd read, "We are sorry that you misunderstood our clearly stated intentions in editing ...."

    I don't buy it, not for a second.

  • sir82

    legal coorporation

    It's still the 15 year old JW apologist.

  • Jeffro

    It's almost certainly unofficial. Not only is the IP from the UK, but if it originated from anything official, they would be far more likely to write to the WikiMedia foundation rather than embarrass themselves with such trite comments. It's therefore most likely some over-zealous JW trying to 'defend the faith'.

  • Jeffro
    Anybody know any JW's in the Westerfield area of Ipswich

    IP address geolocation provides the location of the Internet Service Provider, not individual clients.

    There are other complicated methods that can be used to refine geolocation, for example where an IP range is restricted to a particular city. However, this cannot always be relied upon.

    Geolocation of my IP address gave me a map of a location nearly two thousand kilometres away.

Share this