Talk:Jesse Prince

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Jesse Prince 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

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
More information about this article... The following comments have been left for this page: Needs expansion, add citations, add an image or two, perhaps from some sort of public domain documents... Smee 20:51, 23 March 2007 (UTC). (edit)

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. See comments

[edit] Notable.

• Second-in-command of Religious Technology Center? Notable.

Justanother, you must STOP your inappropriate usage of the edit summaries. The article has been on my watchlist for some time now. I cannot be expected to avoid every single article that you happen to find and edit. This is not what how this works. If you want others to interact with you in a civil manner, you have to be more polite to them, as you said yesterday that you would. If you don't care to have civil polite interactions, keep on acting the way you have been. Thanks. Smee 17:54, 23 March 2007 (UTC).

I expect you to respect my edits and respect my tags. To follow me around to disrespect my good faith edits and good faith tags is the very definition of disruptive wiki-stalking, Ms. Smee. And I will never stop mentioning it as appropriate in edit summaries. That is not rude. --Justanother 17:58, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

This article has been on my watchlist for some time now. Please respect. And Stop your abusive inappropriate edit summaries. Thanks. Please. If you want others to even think about respecting any of your requests, you have to be more polite. If not then no one will pay attention to you. Thanks. Smee 18:00, 23 March 2007 (UTC).

As long as you continue your abusive pattern of behaviour and inappropriate use of edit summaries, how can you expect others to respect any of your comments on talk pages??? Smee 18:02, 23 March 2007 (UTC).

Smee, if you were to stop your abusive editing then I would have nothing to put in these summaries. And please stop pretending that you have some consensus that you do not. Plenty of people, including Scientology critics, respect me and my edits. You are in a minority, Ms. Smee. And please stop pretending that your abusive editing is because I am rude to you. Stating my objection clearly in an edit summary is not rude and you followed me over to these articles to edit-war after promising on User:Sm1969 talk to change. I will continue to be polite to you, Ms. Smee and not sarcastic as that is what I am trying to address on my end. I am not trying to stop pointing out your obvious abuse. --Justanother 18:07, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

The purpose of the edit summary is not to accuse and make accusations. It is simply to briefly describe the last edit you made, and then bring the rest of the discussion to the talk page. If you can do this, I can work with you. Smee 18:11, 23 March 2007 (UTC).

Jesse Prince has been mentioned in newspaper articles, in court, on the RFW page, and he was the Nr.2 in the RTC. Thus, notable. --Tilman 19:49, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

• I can only deal with abusive behaviour on so many pages on my watchlist. Removing this page and of course associated talk page from my watchlist now. Others can deal with the notability tag issue, though the prior Second-in-command over the Religious Technology Center, which effectively controls all the other Scientology organizations, is certainly notable. By the way who is on the board and/or controls the RTC other than David Miscavige? He is the one listed on their Web sites, not exactly a very democratic process they got there... Later y'all... Smee 19:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] second in command

The "second in command" (or at least, very high in the RTC) is sourced by himself (which is probably not enough), but also by a scientology motion [1], which told that Jesse Prince was a janitor who had knowledge about confidential legal strategies and should therefore not be allowed to support Minton. There is also a video from 1986 somewhere, featuring "Commander Jesse Prince". [2][3] --Tilman 17:48, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

I took off the "second in command" from the article since it is unsourced and, as you mentioned, unclear. Steve Dufour 16:10, 2 July 2007 (UTC)