Are you still interested in the "Conflict Thesis" entry? I am currently conducting a seminar on A.D. White's "History of the warfare of Science with Theology" and am using Gary Ferngrens book as a counter-poise. I was quite astounded to find that the articles in Ferngren's book had hardly any references to works written before Draper's and White's books. I was also dismayed by Russell's dismissal of White's thousands of references as so much window-dressing, particularly in view of his lack of any original sources.
In our seminar we have come to realize that not distinguishing between Draper's "Religion" and White's "dogmatic theology" in their works lumps together two significantly different points of view. Moreover, the idea that White is the co-author of a "Conflict thesis" that purports to describe the totality of the relationship of science and religion is simply not founded in historical fact. In our view, he was simply trying to describe the warfare of science with dogmatic theology--nothing more. As you doubtless know, he was a devout Christian, and regarded the conflict he described as a danger to Christianity itself, as he describes in his introduction to his book.
Given the local Zeitgeist of the historians of science--there may be little to be done here. Yet, I think it might be worthwhile to insert a few cautions in the Conflict thesis entry. I am new to Wikipedia, and so I have turned to you to offer my help, should you wish to take up the topic again.
Sincerely, Bleistifter. (actual name on request)