Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scientology/Archive 4
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
AfD
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KRC (Scientology). Cirt (talk) 00:29, 5 December 2007 (UTC).
AfD
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ARC (Scientology). Cirt (talk) 15:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC).
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary DeMoss
- Mary DeMoss, AfD Discussion here. Cirt (talk) 17:27, 20 December 2007 (UTC).
Foundation for Religious Tolerance of Florida
- Foundation for Religious Tolerance of Florida - Article has been prodded for deletion. Cirt (talk) 17:47, 20 December 2007 (UTC).
Alaska Mental Health Enabling Act Main Page nomination
I've nominated Alaska Mental Health Enabling Act, a featured article, to appear on the Main Page on January 16 2008, the 52nd anniversary of the introduction of the Act into the US Congress. Please feel free to comment at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests#January 16. -- ChrisO (talk) 23:08, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- This was removed as only 5 requests are allowed at WP:TFA/R at a time. If a slot opens up, it could be added again for discussion. Cirt (talk) 05:10, 24 December 2007 (UTC).
Recent articles for AfD
- List of Scientology Rundowns
- Closed as merge to Rundown (Scientology). Cirt (talk) 03:37, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Dead FileScientology filmographyScientology discography- AfD closed as "keep". Cirt (talk) 01:15, 28 January 2008 (UTC)- The Creation of Human Ability
- Route to Infinity
Fear (novel)Tone ScaleOrientation (film)
Please also see Wikipedia:WikiProject Scientology/AFD, for list of prodded articles, that do not assert notability in secondary sources. Cirt (talk) 03:30, 20 January 2008 (UTC).
-
- I have removed some of the prods, commenting that i thought the deletions would be sufficiently controversial for AfD. I suggested that they not be brought to AfD all at once, as this might be disruptive of an orderly discussion. DGG (talk) 04:20, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- That's why they were each brought to AfD in individual nominations, and not in a batch of multiple poorly sourced (or not sourced at all) articles - so they can be discussed individually. In many cases the prodded articles had been tagged with problems or as unsourced for actually months or years. Cirt (talk) 04:23, 20 January 2008 (UTC).
- I have removed some of the prods, commenting that i thought the deletions would be sufficiently controversial for AfD. I suggested that they not be brought to AfD all at once, as this might be disruptive of an orderly discussion. DGG (talk) 04:20, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
AfD
- L. Ron Hubbard Classic Lectures. Please see the AfD discussion. Cirt (talk) 11:15, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Articles prodded, prods later removed
I had added the {{prod}} tag to these articles, the tag was later removed. They all have serious notability issues, which someone may wish to address by expanding/sourcing the article(s) with citations to WP:RS/WP:V secondary sources. Cirt (talk) 11:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
- Whole Track
- Touch assist
- Have You Lived Before This Life
- The Scientology Handbook
- Dianetics Today
- Scientology 0-8: The Book of Basics
- The Phoenix Lectures
- Dianetics 55!
- Dianetics: The Original Thesis
- Para-Scientology
- L. Ron Hubbard Classic Lectures
- How to Live Though an Executive
- Scientology 8-8008
- The Technology of Study
- The Cause of Suppression
- MEST (Scientology)
- Golden Age of Knowledge
- Standard Tech
At some point I'll try to remember to go back through these and look in multiple different book and news archives in addition to a simple Google search, and try to determine if they actually are discussed significantly in secondary sources not affiliated with the Church of Scientology or related organizations. Cirt (talk) 11:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Images for deletion
Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2008 February 2 - I happened to notice these as I was looking at a different image. --NE2 12:00, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- Ah thanks, good point, forgot to list images as well. Cirt (talk) 12:11, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- Also, Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2008 February 1. Cirt (talk) 12:11, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Category:Scientologists vs. Category:Freemasons
I am somewhat befuddled by the fact that it is OK to categorize people on the basis of them being scientologists whereas a clear consensus seems to exist that categorizing freemasons is not OK. I'm asking the same question of both WikiProjects (see). What is the significant difference between these two groups in this regard, leaving all POV out of the consideration? __meco (talk) 18:41, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- The history of the discussion was that the category got over-categorized by country, and in many cases, the Masons so classified often had no real role other than as dues-paying members, and many of the listings had no proof. As such, the category was nothing more than a list of members, which we already had an article on. So, we rethought the basis of the category, and didn't come up with a useful version of the cat that had any great number of articles in it.
- Scientology, OTOH, is always well-publicized by its members as affecting them greatly, and they continue to be active in it after joining, meaning it has a lasting effect on their lives in general, and in great quantity. I'm not sure why there's even a comparison being made, as there are on similarities between the two groups at all. MSJapan (talk) 20:06, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- What it comes down to is two different projects making different choices as to how to deal with articles on people who are members. The Scientology project uses categorization, while the Freemasonry project listifies. Both options are considered OK. No two projects do things exactly the same way. Blueboar (talk) 20:46, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Problems with Sci Articles
much of the wikipedia (beliefs and practices) articles read just like their website. i think that, although you're trying not to be biased one way or another, you need to: (a) differentiate between what they claim about themselves and you document as an encyclopedia. much of it just sounds like you're printing whatever scientology wants you to... (b) there aren't references from sources outside of scientology. i know that most of the external references are not positive, but that shouldn't stop you from being objective. (c) I've seen you reject articles for violations of these exact reasons, so be consistent. (d) i know making wikis on lesser known churches are tough, but I think you are being far from objective or encyclopedic on this case. Msheekhah (talk) 18:57, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
- It's being worked on. It's a problem a lot of long-term editors have been striving against, and there's been some progress. The root of the problem is that from time to time Scientologists -- who I should stress have every right to edit here, as long as it's not in an official capacity -- will come along and do a lot of edits, which requires those of us who are not Scientologists to scramble to catch up. I actually have no problem with them doing that -- for instance, it's good to have sections based on the beliefs from sources like Dianetics, as long as we specify that this is where they're from -- but it means we need to be diligent and stop these articles from becoming nothing more than essays on the contents of Hubbard's public writings. --GoodDamon 01:08, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Making a crucial distinction between "Scientology" and the "Church of Scientology".
The introductory page of Wikipedia's discussion of "Scientology" is inaccurate, fundamentally because it fails to distinguish between the body of works which comprise "Scientology" and "Dianetics" (they are not distinct and cannot correctly be understood separately from one another, and the "Church of Scientology". "Scientology", construed broadly, is that body of non-fiction writings and recorded and transcribed lectures by Lafayette Ronald Hubbard on the subject matter of scientology and dianetics between about 1950 and his death in about 1986. Scientology is not a system of "beliefs". It is not a series of corporations, entities or organizations, or even one such entity, whether non-profit or otherwise.
The Church of Scientology is quite another matter, and is analytically quite distinct from the works of L. Ron Hubbard on the topics of dianetics and scientology -- although the Church does grow out of, and obtains the entirety of its ecclesiastical 'authority' to represent itself as, and carry on as, the "Church of Scientology" from those works of L. Ron Hubbard. To be even clearer on this point, the legal corporation which owns the copyrights to L. Ron Hubbard's works in scientology and dianetics is not the Church of Scientology, but the "Church of Spiritual Technology" (incorporated in, and operating from, California), and it is this CST which licenses Hubbards works to the Religious Technology Centre and its ecclesiastically related organizations --- which are known colloquially as the "Church of Scientology".
To suggest, therefore that "Scientology" is a set of interconnected profit-making corporations or organizations is false for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that "Scientology" and "Dianetics" consist of nothing more than the writings and lecturers of Lafayette Ronald Hubbard on those subjects. And, the "Church of Scientology", is merely a series of licensees of these works who employ Hubbard's works in for the spiritual betterment of its parishioners and others who may wish to obtain benefit from Mr. Hubbard's works.
Whether or not the Church of Scientology is succeeding in this mission is a point which has been debated. But, most criticisms of "Scientology" go wrong, when they go wrong, simply because they fail to keep this one little, but important distinction in mind. You can no more tar and feather "Scientology" and "Dianetics" with whatever alleged errors may be lain at the foot of the Church of Scientology, than you can criticize the teachings of the Bible because of the (alleged) mis-deeds the Inquisition or contemporary Catholic clerics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.28.47.100 (talk) 19:14, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
- Unlike other religions, the Church of Scientology owns and enforces copyright on Scientology works. Therefore, in Scientology, belief is not separate from church. Perhaps instead of saying that Scientology is a corporation, we should mention it is owned by a corporation. Foobaz·o< 19:22, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
AfD
Scientology 0-8: The Book of Basics. Cirt (talk) 07:58, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
AfD
The Cause of Suppression. Cirt (talk) 16:59, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Barbara Schawrz
To those interested, I have created two sections about her in two different articles using the best sources from her article. Neutral reportage#Barbara Schwarz v. The Salt Lake Tribune and Freedom of Information Act (United States)#Barbara Schwarz, these topics were determined by an admin to be indirectly related enough to Scientology for the purposes of an arbcom ruling. If he/she is right then perhaps you'll want to include them in the scope of this project. Anynobody 04:09, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the notice. I will keep an eye on them to make sure that personal attacks against Ms Schwarz do not creep into them. Steve Dufour (talk) 23:14, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- The article seems to be o.k. for now. See you all later, perhaps. Steve Dufour (talk) 15:00, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
- This should also be included in the history section of the article The Salt Lake Tribune. Cirt (talk) 23:16, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
That's a great point, considering her lawsuit against them. Anynobody 04:43, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
AfD
Enturbulation was put on AfD, by Outboxing (talk · contribs). Cirt (talk) 17:56, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
AfD
Scientology and sex, AfD was started by Steve Dufour (talk · contribs). Cirt (talk) 19:51, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Speedy delete nomination
Bodhi Elfman Steve Dufour (talk) 02:21, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- Withdrawn since sources were added.Steve Dufour (talk) 05:44, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
AfD notice
The Technology of Study. Cirt (talk) 17:30, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
AfD
The Scientology Handbook, AfD started by Coffeepusher (talk · contribs). Cirt (talk) 23:29, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
AfD
Symbols of Scientology, AfD started by AndroidCat (talk · contribs). Cirt (talk) 09:48, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Speedy deletion
Corin Nemec Steve Dufour (talk) 16:23, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- Withdrawn due to promise to add sources. Steve Dufour (talk) 21:30, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
AfD
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Citizens for Social Reform Steve Dufour (talk) 03:46, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
AfD
How to Live Though an Executive. Cirt (talk) 12:37, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
Proposed template moves
Please see Wikipedia:Requested moves#Incomplete and contested proposals - re: proposed changes/moves of usage of {{Scientology}} and {{Scientology}} and {{WikiProject Scientology}}. Cirt (talk) 20:21, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
AfD
The Phoenix Lectures. Cirt (talk) 04:05, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
AfD
Scientology 8-8008. Cirt (talk) 07:52, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Xenu
I have noticed that Xenu is a featured article and I find this belief to be very interesting. Can any Scientologist tell me how to reach OT III, or how I can study Scientology in a college course or something? Please send me a message to my talk page. Thank you.--Chinese3126 (talk) 20:35, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
WikiProject Scientology: Articles of unclear notability
Hello,
there are currently 10 articles in the scope of this project which are tagged with notability concerns. I have listed them here. (Note: this listing is based on a database snapshot of 12 March 2008 and may be slightly outdated.)
I would encourage members of this project to have a look at these articles, and see whether independent sources can be added, whether the articles can be merged into an article of larger scope, or possibly be deleted. Any help in cleaning up this backlog is appreciated. For further information, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Notability.
If you have any questions, please leave a message on the Notability project page or on my personal talk page. (I'm not watching this page however.) Thanks! --B. Wolterding (talk) 16:53, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
AfD
Golden Age of Tech. Cirt (talk) 22:56, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
AfD
Golden Age of Knowledge. Cirt (talk) 06:45, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
WP:NOR violations at L. Ron Hubbard bibliography
New material added recently to this article violates WP:NOR, as it is either unsourced, or personal interpretation from primary sources. There are also some references provided but not footnotes. I would appreciate it if some other editors could take a look at this article and help monitor/cut down on the WP:NOR violations. Cirt (talk) 22:36, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
AfD
Dianetics 55!. Cirt (talk) 11:43, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
AfD
Scientology controversies, WP:AfD nom by Sceptre (talk · contribs). Cirt (talk) 08:39, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
AfD
Dianetics Today. Cirt (talk) 05:30, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Formatting changes to project page
I made some formatting changes to WP:SCN's main project page, mainly because some of the other sections that were removed have been subsumed by Portal:Scientology and/or Wikipedia:WikiProject Scientology/Assessment. Just simplifies things a bit. Cirt (talk) 11:15, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Request for Comment
Please see the Request for Comment section, of the talk page for The Profit. Cirt (talk) 18:42, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Notability
I tagged the article David Graham (former Scientologist) because it only cites one source - anyone know of more information about this individual in other secondary WP:RS/WP:V sources? Cirt (talk) 07:24, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
AfD
Jesus in Scientology, nom by Richard-of-Earth (talk · contribs). Cirt (talk) 16:02, 30 April 2008 (UTC)