Talk:Ali's Smile/Naked Scientology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
The Arbitration Committee has placed all Scientology-related articles on probation (see relevant arbitration case). Editors making disruptive edits may be banned by an administrator from this and related articles, or other reasonably related pages. |
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject Scientology, a collaborative effort to help develop and improve Wikipedia's coverage of Scientology. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on Scientology-related topics. See WikiProject Scientology and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ. |
|
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to narrative novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions. | ||
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-Class. | ||
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. | ||
 |
This article is supported by the Short story task force. (with unknown importance) | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
[edit] Critical book or a novel
Just in response to the edit summary on the article space, this book is definitely critical of Scientology -- that was the whole point of it. The only reason it's attached to the Novels WikiProject is that it includes a short story, so it qualifies for the short story task force. The rest of the book is a series of essays and letters to the editor. 23skidoo 13:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the clarification. Smee 20:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC).
Um, the term "Science fiction based religion" is a big POV in a confusing manner, as it insults scientology by calling it science fiction (if you wan't my opinion its the silliest nonsense I think I have ever heard in my life). But that just opinion, scientologists honestly seem to believe these things actually occured. You could say any religion that is based upon anything that doesn't conform to the scientific method to be fiction, but that's not the case either, fiction is something seen as fictional, not a widely held belief that is considered highly unlikely scientifically. On the other hand it refers to scientology as a religion, which it is not based upon the fact that it doesn't believe in a diety, is not recognised by a great many nations as an actual church, requires its members to pay large sums to learn its techniques etc. it is clearly a cult from a logical perspective (under the definition of a cult) but that's not a NPOV either because it is believed to be a religion by its members. the most nuetral description is "body of teachings", which is how the article on scientology itself describes it (in part, in full its "body of teachings and techniques" but this seems to long for the brief description). Colin 8 05:20, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
- If you feel a statement is incorrect or violates NPOV, please feel free to make the appropriate changes. I personally have heard it referred to as thus many times, based upon Hubbard being a SF author, but that aside Wikipedia articles aren't the places to debate the whys and wherefors of Scientology or any religion. That's what Burroughs' book is for. 23skidoo 19:18, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:AlisSmile.jpg
Image:AlisSmile.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 04:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
