Talk:Stacy Brooks

This article was nominated for deletion on December 3, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography

Scientology Mid‑importance

	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.ScientologyWikipedia:WikiProject ScientologyTemplate:WikiProject ScientologyScientology
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Keep and expand this article

This person was a whistle blower. There is plenty of material to refer to; videos, interviews, affidavits, etc.. Her actions can be seen by some people as heroic. She was also an "expert" witness in court.

Whether a subject or person is a matter of controversy is not a reason for deleting an article. The alleged facts are verifiable and verified through a series of references (Unlike some pages filled with balderdash and no reference at all). Thus there is absolutely no reason to delete this page.

Please expand or modify this page at your will, but do not let anyone remove it.

184.94.60.242 (talk) 21:12, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know much about her, but she is an important person in the movement to expose the human rights abuses of Scientology. This page reeks of someone trying to turn Wikipedia into a hatesite against her. Cath reen (talk) 04:00, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion

This article was nominated for deletion. The outcome was speedy keep following a rewrite and subsequent withdrawal of nomination. Capitalistroadster 01:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes I didnt see your comment there and added {{oldafdfull}} to the page, sorry! Glen 01:34, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, its okay to add the {{oldafdfull}} template anyway. Eventually, these comments may be archived, but that notice should stay at the top of this page. -- Satori Son 16:19, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the article on Jesse Prince's Marijuana Trial a Reference for Stacy Brooks?

The link *Scientology critic won't face retrial St. Petersburg Times, published May 26, 2001 only quotes her in discussing the Prince trial and other, un-named trials. It gives no information about Ms. Brooks. I don't see its relevance. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Azawalli (talk • contribs) 02:30, August 24, 2007 (UTC).

Non-Free Image

I am emailing the owner of a non-free image of Stacy Brooks to ask him whether Wikipedia may use it.--Newbiepedian 21:52, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Video issues

I uploaded a .WEBM video to Wikimedia (m:File:Stacy Brooks.webm), and got the relevant permissions dealt with. However, I see it doesn't play correctly on all browsers (gives an error message). If anyone knows how to fix this, perhaps by downloading the video and saving it in a better format, please do so. I'm really not that familiar with videos or Wikimedia. Grorp (talk) 00:58, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]