(1/9) Epstein had multiple trolls insert PR into Wikipedia articles about him and downplay his crimes. Smallbones, a Wikipedia editor, wrote an article about it for the wiki's news publication, The Signpost.

You can read the article here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2020-03-29/In_focus

(2/9) From October 2007 to February 2008, an anonymous (unregistered) IP editor was removing large amounts of content about child molestation and assault accusations.

You can see the edits here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/63.165.175.253

(3/9) The first problematic registered user was Stgeorge12. He started editing in December 2011, and was indefinitely (meaning without a block expiration date) blocked in January 2012 because he started using another account ("Ottotiv") in addition to his main account Stgeorge12.

(4/9)
Stgeorge12's edits: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Stgeorge12
Ottotiv's edits: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Ottotiv

The next troublemaker is Turvill/Turville. Turvill made various edits; for example, he tried to delete the mugshot below, he created a spam article on Epstein's namesake and lied about ...

(5/9) ... Epstein's foundation giving "approximately $200 million a year" to scientists since its inception in 2000. The amount is actually less than $20 million since the foundation's inception.

This has originally been documented by The New York Times...

(6/9)
The NY Times article: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/26/business/jeffrey-epstein-charity.html
The financial statements: https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/6429-financial-statements-for-j-ep/d62c5cfd865660451cac/optimized/full.pdf#page=1

You can read more about Turvill in the article in The Signpost.

This is Turvill's final edit:

(7/9) As The Signpost reports, Turvill began editing the "Jeffrey Epstein VI Foundation" article on Wikipedia in the same month that Epstein met MIT Media Lab director Joi Ito for the first time.

An independent report commissioned by MIT found that MIT considered the risks ...

(8/9) ... associated with Epstein but accepted his money anyway. They say that they looked at Epstein's Wikipedia article, which at the time contained the pictured statements according to the report.

Goodwin Procter’s report: http://factfindingjan2020.mit.edu/files/MIT-report.pdf?200117

(9/9) Epstein's biography on Wikipedia used to be much more obscure, enabling a handful of single-purpose accounts to gain a false consensus against the few good-faith policy-based editors.

Credit goes to Smallbones. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Smallbones