Talk:Dead File

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was nominated for deletion on January 20, 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dead File article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

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.

	Scientology Portal 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.)

[edit] Recommendations

The reliance of this article on primary sources alone is problematic. Also, it seems to be only elaboration on one particular aspect of the larger subject of Ethics (Scientology). I would recommend that whatever secondary sources can be found that deal with this subject be found, and then the information from the secondary and where necessary the primary sources be added to the existing Ethics (Scientology) section. -- Antaeus Feldspar 01:05, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

To be accurate, Dead File is related to ethics, but is actually an administrative function as literally any org staff member can dead file a public. This needs to be an article unto itself, therefore. And yes, more secondary sources need to be added.--Fahrenheit451 01:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

By this rationale, is there nothing in Scientology that doesn't allegedly deserve its own article? You people are turning Wikipedia into a virtual Scientology directory unto itself. wikipediatrix 13:03, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

This article is basically an orphan. AndroidCat 18:29, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't quite get what the article is about. People not answering their mail? It that notable? Steve Dufour 17:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Steve, then you have not read the article or you are being dishonest. It is about policy that dictates refusing to respond to mail. The application of that policy has been notable.--Fahrenheit451 03:31, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

The CoS is an organization of about 100,000 people world-wide. Why should its policy about answering or not answering mail be worth an encyclopedia article? (p.s. The 100,000 is total church members. The number of people who work in church offices that would be subject to this policy is far less, I am sure.) Steve Dufour 04:09, 30 September 2007 (UTC)