Talk:Suzanne Shell

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Suzanne Shell 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
Stub	This article has been rated as stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

An individual covered by or significantly related to this article, Suzanne Shell, has edited Wikipedia as Dsshell (talk · contribs)

Contents 1 Scientology 2 Vandalism 3 Picture? 4 Questionable facts and neutrality

[edit] Scientology

Just because she was quoted in a magazine published by the Church of Scientology does not mean she has "ties" to them or is involved in their organization. Such claims need to be sourced. Jokestress 03:57, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

After thorough checking, I agree with you. To put this issue to rest, I would like to point out that all of the internet sites discussing this have only turned up this to date:

• In a posting by Shell to a Yahoo group, she mentions having worked with Citizens Commission on Human Rights, a Scientology group. She states that she has worked with "various of their offices" [1].
• She has been interviewed in Scientology magazines about her concerns with child welfare and her problems with gov't/psychiatrist handling of child welfare cases.
• She sued archive.org , a website that has also been sued by COS.

Does not seem like a direct connection, just intersecting interests. There was no "smoking gun" found by anyone on the internet, and in this day and age I think if there was a direct connection it would have surfaced under all of the scrutiny. My guess would be that she had interacted with the CCHR on cases against DHS in the past, which is understandable as both she and CCHR have similar issues with DHS. This could easily have led to her being profiled in a publication(s)of the COS, but she does not seem to be a Scientologist or have any other connections with the organization. Gallup 20:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the follow-up on this. Jokestress 21:03, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

This page needs to be stopped edited by unsourced claims. Keep arguments and point of view out of wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.123.98.54 (talk • contribs) 04:08, 19 March 2007

[edit] Picture?

Would someone with the right technical, and legal expertise please upload a picture for this article if it's possible/legal to do so? Also, would it be okay to link the image under 'external links' if we can't post a picture of her?

I'm not aware of a fair use picture available, but if you read the Freedom Magazine article cited in the article references, there's a photo for those interested. Unfortunately, we can't deep link to it. Jokestress 08:26, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

You can, you'll just need to enter into a contract and pay her $50000 in internet monies to save a copy of it to your hard drive. Lankiveil 11:13, 19 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Questionable facts and neutrality

You aren't getting the facts right. Even the most basic ones such as all the the dates and ages. The discussion of the status of the Internet Archive case is wrong, too. I have two claims still alive - you neglected to mention the copyright infringement claim. It doesn't appear the author has even read the lawsuit, but is just parroting the published inaccurate analyses by other authors. This whole thing presents me in the light portrayed by my adversaries. Since I have been a human rights activist since 1991, it makes me a target to be discredited. How about getting both sides of the events? This account is not very accurate or neutral. Dsshell 17:20, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment-- can you provide specific instances of errors and published sources with the correct information? Thanks! Jokestress 20:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

As a follow-up, please provide any published sources we can use that you feel will help give the article more balance. Thank you! Jokestress 21:18, 20 March 2007 (UTC)