Talk:Celebrity Centre
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. |
|
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-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.) |
|
 |
It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality, if possible. Wikipedians in Los Angeles County, California may be able to help! |
Contents |
[edit] Series Template
Removing this Series Template from across the Scientology related pages. This is not correct usage of Series Templates per the guidelines. They were set up to show the history of countries and were different articles form a sequential series. This is not the case with the Scientology pages, which are random pages on different topics – not a sequence of any kind. Wiki’s definition of a series is: “In a general sense, a series is a related set of things that occur one after the other (in a succession) or are otherwise connected one after the other (in a sequence).” Nuview, 15:25, 10 January 2006 (PST)
[edit] Bias in the Article
I'm going to quote the article to point out an example of it's Anti-Scientology bias.
Critics of Scientology point to the fact that Hubbard launched "Project Celebrity" in 1955 to recruit celebrities into the cult and say that the centres were established for this purpose, because celebrity members give Scientology the publicity it needs to recruit more members.
This article needs a SERIOUS overhaul and links to non-bias sources. The Fading Light 8:34, 22 March 2006
- Well stated. Terryeo 19:56, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- While blankedly labeling the CoS as a cult is PV rather than NPOV, the truth of the matter is, that is what Hubbard was intending anyway. The word "cult" could be removed, in the interest of fairness and neutrality it should be removed, however it IS true that Hubbard was crazy about celebs for PR purposes. But then many organizations are like that, so to take such great offense is quite silly. It's not CoS specific, not in the least, however it does apply to the CoS and to Hubbard's vision. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jros83 (talk • contribs) 22:02, 15 May 2007 (UTC).
Sorry, I fully intended to sign, it just slipped my mind =) John 01:04, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Link [2]
Link [2] points to [1] and apparently does so because the information just preceeding it is contained on the webpage. However, the webpage is the personal property of one Kristi Wachter Kristi . Kristi's personal opinion would be appropriate as an exterior link, but since a personal website does not satisfy WP:V which requires, "previously published by reputable and reliable sources", and because WP:RS specifically denies that personal websites can be used as secondary sources of information in Wikipedia articles. That citation should be removed to an "exterior links" section and the quoted text removed from the article. Terryeo 19:54, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Merge proposal
Currently the Celebrity (magazine) has long term notability and reference problems. I don't really see what's there as supporting an article, but it could be moved in as a paragraph in this article. Anyone have any objections? AndroidCat (talk) 00:21, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
