Although some edit wars that I had encountered in one particular topic's pages that I am currently watching left me less than desirous of contributing to that Wiki topic, I have come to the conclusion that adverse experiences such as the ones outlined below, should never dissuade an individual from contributing to Wikipedia. Wikipedia should be enjoyable for editors and when it isn't, editors should step back, figure it out and try to resolve it. Unfortunately, that's not always possible without the assistance of administrators and like "Education Administrators" in a university setting; WP administrators can certainly monitor and help resolve the challenges editors face in this quasi-academic setting. Hence, I will edit if and when I see fit, within the guidelines of Wikipedia, and hope that other editors are not chased away or intimidated by any such challenges that they themselves may face when editing controversial topics. Now back to your regularly scheduled programming......IP law girl 07:30, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
I am editing my user page because an individual here on Wikipedia made an attempt to impersonate me by using a user ID very similar to mine. They have been using User:IP_Law_Girl to edit these pages and thankfully an administrator has investigated the matter and the sockpuppet has been unmasked. I cannot remotely fathom why someone would do something like this but I would like to state for the record that I am an individual user with no need for the use of sockpuppets or any other such tactics.
Frankly, this whole incident has really creeped me out to the point that I have no intention of editing this topic again nor it's talk pages and I have not done so since my last edit on December 22, 2005. Furthermore, I have no desire to engage in further "edit wars" with other users regarding this or any other Wikipedia topic. I hope that both the readers and editors of Wikipedia will keep in mind that this is a public site that anyone can edit and unfortunately public access to resources such as this one is not always a positive thing and can lead to improprieties such as some of the behaviors witnessed in this particular topic's pages. When doing research on any topic, one should always consider the source of the information that he or she is reading. G.K. Chesterton wrote: "A good novel tells us the truth about its hero; but a bad novel tells us the truth about its author" In these pages of the Jehovah's Witnesses topic, we have seen many bad pages that have revealed unflattering truths about its authors and their motives. It is my hope that any readers of this topic will find what they are looking for about the topic they are researching. Whether a reader is looking to find criticism or positive information about this topic, they will find both within these pages. If a person seeks to find fact, they should perhaps also look to other resources, as the assertions of "fact" on these pages seem to change on a regular basis by its contributing editors. Readers should peruse Wikipedia with the knowledge that any controversial topic, be it religion, culture or politics; will be fraught with varied and often extreme opinions from individuals advocating for their position.
This topic's pages have become more of a "chat room" or rather, a "war room", than an encyclopedic resource. I, for my part, have no interest in deflecting further assault.
.svg){kind=small}
.svg){kind=small}
