Talk:Don Alden Adams

Notability
See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Jehovah's_Witnesses-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 01:22, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Religious Leader
Outside sources may call him "religious leader of Jehovah's Witnesses", but that's not true. Don Adams is not a religious leader. The leader of Jehovah's Witnesses is the Bible. So the statement should be deleted. (See paragraph "Watch Tower presidency") --Mengenstrom (talk) 09:36, 18 April 2010 (UTC)


 * The sentence was added here by an editor who wished to add some external sources to allow the article to meet Wikipedia standards of notability. You may be correct that those newspapers are wrong, but I have never heard of a book being described as a leader of a religion. Perhaps you could leave a message with that editor on his talk page to ask him whether he, as a presumed Jehovah's Witness, shares your objection to the description. BlackCab (talk) 11:10, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I must also agree with above Jehovah's Witnesses call no man with the expectation of Jesus Christ as their 'leader.' I am curious would Don Alden Adams be a member of anointed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anaccuratesource (talk • contribs) 18:12, 5 July 2010 (UTC)


 * The leaders of the organization in terms of establishing doctrines and activities are clearly the Governing Body. It is they who are described in the September 15, 2010 Watchtower as "taking the lead" and "leading and directing" members of the religion. Adams clearly has an administrative role only. I doubt that anything he says about doctrines and activities has any more weight than anyone else in the organization and is therefore not a religioius leader. I'll delete the reference. BlackCab (talk) 00:05, 6 July 2010 (UTC)


 * The description of Adams as the "religious leader" of the Jehovah's Witnesses is, for better or for worse, well documented in the popular press. It's not appropriate to remove factual information that's clearly referenced.  If Adams is indeed not the religious leader of the Jehovah's Witnesses, then we need to find reliable sources which say that, not just remove well-cited claims from the existing article. Tim Pierce (talk) 13:12, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

However, what would be the source of the so-called well documented cases? For example, would we dare talk willy-nilly quoting works of Nazi literature for so-called "well-document" information on things as Jewish history.

Truly would it not be wiser to use our discretion? I politely ask of which so-called "well-document" case statement are these? Where do they come from: Jehovah's Witnesses or outside material (maybe with containing bias)? Additionally, are these references up-to-date, accurate, and in proper context?

These matters are of importance in my opinion. I hope the kind and hard working editor/-s of wikipedia might please consider consulting with the official representatives of Jehovah's Witnesses. - Because is not corroboration really true well-documentation? (Anaccuratesource (talk) 03:45, 12 July 2010 (UTC)).


 * The claim so far rests on the Rulers.org website, whose credibility and reliability is anyone's guess, and two articles in Canadian newspapers. No bylines are provided for the newspaper articles and judging by the similar headings on the stories and their publication dates, they may well be the same story. I'd suggest that's a poor basis on which to make the claim that Adams is the Witnesses' religious leader. It seems more logical to request better sources for the claim than news sources denying it. BlackCab (talk) 04:55, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
 * A minor smattering of relatively minor sources saying he's the religion's 'leader' doesn't make it a notable point. Even if he's 'occasionally' cited as the leader, unless a particularly notable source makes that claim, it's not particularly worth stating.-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 08:47, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Years under 'President of Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society'
Why has an unregistered person (from merely an IP address) been DROPPING or abbreviating information and abbreviating that information from actual calendar dates, to years only? cf.President of Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society 1884–1916

MaynardClark (talk) 04:36, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

This article is absolutely false.
Don A. Adams is not the president of the Watchtower Society and has never been one. L. Weaver Jr, Currently serves as the president of the Watchtower society. (w2016 May pg. 2 bottom footer). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:6000:A343:6C00:283B:B2FE:7B12:FC30 (talk) 17:15, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Leon Weaver Jr. is currently the President of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc. As this article makes clear, Adams is the President of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, a separate legal entity used by JW's. Vyselink (talk) 18:50, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

No longer President?
In George D. Chryssides new book (just published last month) Jehovah's Witnesses: Continuity and Change, on page 143, he states "...in 2014 Don Adams was replaced by Robert Ciranko" as President of the WTBTSP. I don't want to change it yet as I think it should have some corroborating evidence before doing so. Vyselink (talk) 11:54, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Do we have a reason to doubt this source? Ciranko is referenced in JW literature as a 'helper' to the 'Governing Body' in association with the 'Writing Committee'.-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 07:48, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Nope. George D. Chryssides is a pretty well respected scholar, it's just such a new book I didn't want to just put it in in case he happened to be wrong. Vyselink (talk) 18:31, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * So who is President of the WTS now–Ciranko? If so, shouldn't there be an article about him, linked from this page and others about the Witnesses, even if the article is only a stub? 64.85.231.88 (talk) 04:15, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I have updated the article to reflect the fact that no specific year is available for the start of Ciranko's tenure as WTS preisdent. The only available source says Ciranko was already incumbent in April 2016.
 * There are not sufficient sources about Ciranko to warrant an article.-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 09:54, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Well I did give a source above that states Ciranko was made president in 2014. Vyselink (talk) 16:06, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Duh. Sorry, I just appended to the existing thread without reading the start of it. Not sure why this wasn't fixed a year ago. It seems fairly uncontroversial. Will fix it now.-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 00:16, 10 June 2017 (UTC)