Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scientology/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

AfD

AfD

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary DeMoss

Foundation for Religious Tolerance of Florida

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)

Recent articles for AfD

  1. List of Scientology Rundowns
  2. Dead File
  3. Scientology filmography
  4. Scientology discography - AfD closed as "keep". Cirt (talk) 01:15, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
  5. The Creation of Human Ability
  6. Route to Infinity
  7. Fear (novel)
  8. Tone Scale
  9. Orientation (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).

AfD

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)

  1. Whole Track
  2. Touch assist
  3. Have You Lived Before This Life
  4. The Scientology Handbook
  5. Dianetics Today
  6. Scientology 0-8: The Book of Basics
  7. The Phoenix Lectures
  8. Dianetics 55!
  9. Dianetics: The Original Thesis
  10. Para-Scientology
  11. L. Ron Hubbard Classic Lectures
  12. How to Live Though an Executive
  13. Scientology 8-8008
  14. The Technology of Study
  15. The Cause of Suppression
  16. MEST (Scientology)
  17. Golden Age of Knowledge
  18. 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)

That's a great point, considering her lawsuit against them. Anynobody 04:43, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Yup. Cirt (talk) 05:38, 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)

Result was Snowball Keep. Cirt (talk) 05:00, 18 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)

RfC closed, thanks to those that commented. Cirt (talk) 06:56, 19 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)

AfD closed, result was Keep. Cirt (talk) 07:25, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

AfD

Dianetics: The Original Thesis. Cirt (talk) 22:01, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Steven Fishman

new article, no longer just a redirect. Fishman has significance beyond Scientology and his affidavit, in that his criminal case set a precedent for legal defenses based on brainwashing. WillOakland (talk) 06:03, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

AfD

Dianetics: The Evolution of a Science. Cirt (talk) 03:27, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

AfD

AfD

David Graham (former Scientologist). Cirt (talk) 19:52, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

AfD

Security Check Children. Cirt (talk) 05:22, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

WP:GAR for article Dianetics

I have listed the article Dianetics for Good article reassessment. Input would be appreciated at Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Dianetics/1. Cirt (talk) 22:50, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

AfD

AfD

Squirreling. Cirt (talk) 05:40, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

  • The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
  • The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
  • A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 20:47, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

AfD

AfD

Variant texts in Scientology doctrine. Cirt (talk) 19:52, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Simple English Wikipedia

The editors of the Simple English Wikipedia could use some help with Scientology related articles. Right now, their relevant content consists of only the following articles: Beck Hansen, Church of Scientology, Edgar Winter, John Travolta, Katie Holmes, Kirstie Alley, L Ron Hubbard, Nancy Cartwright, Priscilla Presley, Scientology, and Tom Cruise. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me, User:American Eagle, or User:Eptalon. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 23:02, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

AfD

Noelle North. Cirt (talk) 04:31, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

AfD

Shawn Lonsdale. Cirt (talk) 04:25, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Articles flagged for cleanup

Currently, 390 articles are assigned to this project, of which 155, or 39.7%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 14 July 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. More than 150 projects and work groups have already subscribed, and adding a subscription for yours is easy - just place a template on your project page.

If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page; I'm not watching this page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 18:20, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

 Done, should magically (hopefully) show up at Wikipedia:WikiProject Scientology/Cleanup listing at some point in the near future. Cirt (talk) 23:50, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Yay, it worked, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Scientology/Cleanup listing. Cirt (talk) 19:42, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

David Singer

Richter102 (talk · contribs) has tried to remove a lot of material from David Singer. Someone familiar with the topic may want to take a look.-Wafulz (talk) 15:28, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Scientology

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:29, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Audio interview hosted at BlogTalkRadio

  • Olsen, Dawn. "Church of Scientology, David Miscavige, Marc Headley, Tom Cruise". BlogTalkRadio. www.blogtalkradio.com. Retrieved 2008-08-30.

There is a question about usage of the above audio interview source in the biographical article David Miscavige, because that audio interview is hosted on BlogTalkRadio. A Request for Comment has been opened to assess community viewpoints on this. Please weigh in at Talk:David Miscavige#Request for Comment. Thank you, Cirt (talk) 11:57, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

RFC closed, thanks to those that participated. Cirt (talk) 09:22, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Relevancy?

While I know this is a highly controversial topic, does it really require this much Wikipedia material, including a project? Also, when did these articles expand so much, as well as changing their 'view'. Scientology seems like a much better thing, as far as wikipedia is concerned now, then it did 6 months ago. Was there a lawsuit involved? I'm just very confused why the sudden change in direction for the articles, especially over controversy involving the church. Almost all of the 'facts' in the beginning of the articles seems to come from the CoS itself, with controversy shoved into a corner at the edge. Adding on to what I said earlier, I believe that most of the scientology project falls under the WIKIPEDIA IS NOT A SOAP BOX (specifically propaganda, advocacy, or recruitment clause),WIKIPEDIA IS NOT CENSORED, CONFLICT OF INTEREST (for just about anyone who is a scientologist or heavily anti-scientoligist), NEUTRAL POINT OF VIEW, UNDUE WEIGHT (scientology seems to have far more detractors then supporters), IMPARTIAL TONE, and POV FORKS being the main problems with the scientology project. I admit, I am slightly negatively biased, but when a small relgion/cult with about 3 million followers gets an entire project and something like the Falun Gong, a medium religion/philosophy with 100 million followers gets a handful of articles, I feel a little suspicious.Zanotam - Google me (talk) 23:01, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review

Eugene Ingram, undergoing deletion review - discussion here. Cirt (talk) 09:22, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Deletion endorsed, see discussion. Cirt (talk) 22:40, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Which sources on the Free Zone meet WP:RS?

Our coverage of Scientology is not complete if we can only cover the Church of Scientology's version of it. However, it is not clear which sources we can turn to for information on the Free Zone that will not be attacked as not being reliably sourced. This is of course a valid concern, since there are indeed many sites which have been put up with the intent of slandering the Free Zone, including probably some which pretend to be part of the Free Zone.

So, my question is, can we assemble a list of the sites which are unquestionably reliable sources for members of the Free Zone? I'm not talking about the impossible goal of trying to find sources who can speak for the whole Free Zone; I'm simply looking for sources who can be cited for such matters as the "Free Zone Decree" and to document that certain viewpoints do exist within the Free Zone even if they are not shared by the entirety of the Free Zone. -- 65.78.13.238 (talk) 00:51, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

All cites should be reliable sources that satisfy the verifiability policy, and are preferably secondary sources. Questions about individual sources can be discussed at the reliable sources noticeboard. Cirt (talk) 00:54, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Thank you, but that's not in any way, shape or form an answer to my question. -- 65.78.13.238 (talk) 04:10, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
My personal take would be that I doubt many of these websites would be deemed to be reliable, but as I have already said they could be discussed individually at WP:RSN. Cirt (talk) 04:21, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Let's look at the pages at scientologie.org, which according to the WIPO[1] belongs to Freie Zone e.V. (Free Zone Association), which went to court for the right to use that domain. Would your personal take be that these pages can at least be used to cite certain information stated by Freie Zone e.V. which is part of the Free Zone, or is your personal take that we should simply stop trying to include any information about the Free Zone because we could never find sources which could be taken through all the necessary hoops? Beg your pardon, but that is the way it comes across. -- 65.78.13.238 (talk) 22:47, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
My "personal take" would be to try to avoid use of primary sources when possible and rely instead on secondary WP:RS/WP:V sources. If necessary in certain limited instances, we could use a particular website as a source with the note in the article attributing the information to that specific source, e.g.: "According to X...". But again, that's just my take, for complex issues like these it might be best to get wider input through WP:RSN. Cirt (talk) 22:57, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

What are the criteria for determining whether something belongs in the category of "Scientology controversies"?

71.231.182.186 (talk · contribs) and WillOakland (talk · contribs) have been doing a lot lately to depopulate Category:Scientology controversies, claiming, for instance, that there is absolutely no Scientology controversy regarding Anastasius Nordenholz, despite him authoring the book Scientologie, Wissenschaft von der Beschaffenheit und der Tauglichkeit des Wissens which formed the basis for a major domain dispute between the Free Zone and the Church of Scientology, won by the Free Zone. 71.231.182.186 also decided to not only remove Philip Gale from Category:Scientology controversies, but to remove information about Gale's involvement in Scientology.[2] I think it would be good to come to some sort of general consensus about what does belong in Category:Scientology controversies before 71.231.182.186 and WillOakland decide that nothing meets their standards for a "Scientology controversy". -- 65.78.13.238 (talk) 22:57, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

There isn't really a guideline for what is or is not appropriate for inclusion in the article Category:Scientology controversies - but a rough guide could be the article itself Scientology controversies, or independent discussion on the talk pages of specific articles themselves. Cirt (talk) 05:14, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

L. Ron Hubbard good article reassessment

L. Ron Hubbard has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Articles are typically reviewed for one week. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. Cirt (talk) 09:38, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

AfD

Whole Track. Cirt (talk) 10:42, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Prod

See Toronto Ability School. Cirt (talk) 19:40, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Scientology, original research, and wikipedia.

Scientology as a belief system has an interesting dilemma on wikipedia. What we have here is a set of beliefs and statements relating to psychology in general, while in many cases constituting original research (L Ron Hubbard is considered by followers to be the sole author of Scientology and "source" of truth). The fact that Scientology has a following and such a history of litigation makes Scientology itself notable. However, I am still not sure of the extent to which the teachings can be considered notable, as they contain thinly-disguised plagiarisms (I'll see if I can dig up some specific examples later) and generally unaccepted statements about psychology.

Take for example, Scientology and sex, and Study tech. The pages are filled with "Hubbard states", "Hubbard says", "Hubbard wrote", and "Hubbard decreed". Although he has many published works, I often question whether they fall under the category of original research. ARC (Scientology) was removed, even though I know from experience that this concept is very important to most Scientologists.

Does anyone else have any thoughts on this? Spidern (talk) 13:52, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes. WP:OR should be avoided, primary sources pruned, and we should endeavor to find and rely upon secondary sources instead. Cirt (talk) 19:10, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Requesting an assessment

Moved here from Wikipedia:WikiProject_Scientology/Assessment#Requesting_an_assessment. Cirt (talk) 23:32, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Scientology - I have made some significant changes to this article. Mostly I've been pruning primary sources and removing ambiguous or deceptive information. We've managed to bring the article size down by 28.12kb since Oct 30. If the article is still qualified as C-class, I would like to clarify what objectives must be pursued to work towards attaining a B-class or higher assessment. ←Spidern→ 08:08, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
In my opinion -- and I haven't been active as a project member here in the past -- the greatest failing of the article in its present (and also former) state is that it makes insufficient use of the existing academic literature on Scientology. Scientology has been discussed in literally hundreds of scholarly publications, yet we reference and mirror only a very tiny part of that. Roy Wallis's seminal and widely cited "The Road to Total Freedom" (1977) is not referenced at all. The first thing I would suggest is to perform a thorough review of the scholarly literature and represent its main themes and viewpoints in the article in proportion to their prominence. Press coverage should be the second priority. Primary sources – of all types, incl. Scientology websites – the last. My two cents. Cheers, Jayen466 21:24, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
You got my vote on this, for what it's worth. Shutterbug (talk) 23:50, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Two articles for deletion discussions

  1. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scientology and sex (2nd nomination)
  2. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Homosexuality and Scientology

Both nominated by Justallofthem (talk · contribs). Cirt (talk) 19:47, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Result of both was Keep. Cirt (talk) 16:17, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

AfD

Arbitration Enforcement thread

FYI there is a thread on the Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard, which is currently open here: Wikipedia:AE#Scientology_and_related_articles. Cirt (talk) 13:49, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Xenu

Xenu has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:45, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

The article was kept by User:Joelr31 14:40, 5 December 2008 [3]. Cirt (talk) 03:04, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Scientology and sex

This article could use more attention and discussion on the article's talk page. Thank you, Cirt (talk) 18:36, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Celebrity Center split?

Having looked over a few articles on the subject, I have reason to believe that the Los Angeles Celebrity Center is notable enough to qualify for a separate article. I'm not done yet, but the same might apply to a few other CCs or Orgs as well, like the New York Org. Would there be any objections to branching content on these locations if sufficient sources to demonstrate notability were produced? John Carter (talk) 19:26, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Since we already have a Scientology in Australia article, I think we could do with articles about whether regions, since there are different historical, political and legal issues in each region, and different media coverage. Hence I personally would recommend creating "Scientology in California" or even "Scientology in Los Angeles" and putting your suggested content there- these could eventually be quite rich articles covering local orgs, history and any involvement in local businesses or politics.MartinPoulter (talk) 13:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
In general, I would agree, and helped create the Scientology in Germany article on that basis. However, regarding this particular building, the building itself has a rather significant documented history, including substantial coverage in the book Hollywood Babylon and elsewhere dating to the time before it became associated with Scientology. John Carter (talk) 16:44, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Milestone Announcements

Announcements
  • All WikiProjects are invited to have their "milestone-reached" announcements automatically placed onto Wikipedia's announcements page.
  • Milestones could include the number of FAs, GAs or articles covered by the project.
  • No work need be done by the project themselves; they just need to provide some details when they sign up. A bot will do all of the hard work.
Click here for more information or to sign your project up.

I thought this WikiProject might be interested. Ping me with any specific queries or leave them on the page linked to above. Thanks! - Jarry1250 (t, c) 22:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Scientology in Germany a GA nominee

The article Scientology in Germany is currently being considered for Good Article status. Any assistance is more than welcome. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 17:44, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Coordinators' working group

Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 06:29, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

AfD

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clear Expansion Committee - Nom started by Cirt (talk) 05:51, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Article alerts

Just a reminder that it's best to either give links to the alerts page Wikipedia:WikiProject Scientology/Article alerts on the project's mainpage, or to not use the display=none option.Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:20, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, will do. Cirt (talk) 09:28, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

The "Clear" Homo-Novis & the Scientology understanding of homosapiens

I wonder, why there is no information under article Clear_(Scientology) about Homo-Novis ? Its well known understanding, that once people are "Clear" according to Scientology they are no more humans like us (Homosapien) but new race called Homo-Novis. Therefor also they are "the only hope for this section of the galaxy, starting with planet Earth". But besides that according to readings and

I think it would be also important to add definition according to "Dianetics and Scientology Technical Dictionary" for Homosapien - only this way people can understand what is "Clear" and how they see other people who are not.

HOMO NOVIS, 1. Homo man, novis new. 2 . a theta-animated mest body possesed of new and desirable attributes; a mest clear, a good, sane rational mest being about a skycraper higher than Homo sap~ens. 3 . the Second Stage Release is definitely Homo novis. The person ceases to respond like Homo sapiens and has fantastic capability to learn and act.

HOMO SAPIENS, 1. a mest body, whether it belongs to the race of man or the race of ants is yet but an animated vegetable. Given a theta being to guide it, it becomes part of a composite such as Homo sapiens. By itself, the body would live, walk around, react, sleep, kill, and direct an existence no better than that of a field mouse, or a zombie. Put a theta being over it and it becomes possessed of ethics and morals and direction and goals and the ability to reason; it becomes this strange thing called Homo sapiens.

Lawyer Graham Berry actually quoted this same information, on hes talks in Germany [1] - and so much more information. He explains how they justify many of their actions in their inner circle "they are just homosapiens and they do not understand what is right". I am sore most of you will know these videos but many of this information seems to be missing from wikipedia (or maybe it is not - but i have not jet finish reading all 240+ articles). From same gathering you can find Jason Beghe talking on this exact same subject [2] (around 6'th minute - maybe even better source then first one).

Waffa 01:32, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

DYK

Does the project have a list of articles featured in the DYK section? If so, can someone show me where to add L. Ron Hubbard House? Gracias. APK is ready for the tourists to leave 13:53, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Added into rotation, at Portal:Scientology. Cirt (talk) 20:44, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
Gracias. APK is ready for the tourists to leave 21:04, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Gabriel Williams

I've nominated Scientology related article Gabriel Williams for deletion. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gabriel Williams. Adambro (talk) 10:29, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Ali's Smile: Naked Scientology on Peer review

Ali's Smile: Naked Scientology recently achieved WP:GA status and is now on peer review. See Wikipedia:Peer review/Ali's Smile: Naked Scientology/archive1. Cirt (talk) 20:10, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

User:Mr.Z-man has a new service available to various requesting WikiProjects which gives the project a monthly update of the number of hits on the 1,000 most frequently accessed articles for that project. An example of such a listing can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/Popular pages. Would the members of this project be interested in getting such a list for their use? John Carter (talk) 18:58, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Sure, that sounds like it would be useful to have. Cirt (talk) 20:40, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

New pages

I have created the well overdue article Scientology in the United States as well as Scientology in France. They are based on info from other WP articles and may need a little rationalising and editing. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 08:50, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Sounds great, thank you! Cirt (talk) 08:56, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

History of Scientology

Wikipedia:WikiProject Scientology/History Article Project needs resurrecting (pardon the pun!). It has been inactive since 2007. A History of Scientology is sorely needed. Timeline of Scientology is ok (probably needs expanding) but we need an article with actual prose. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 08:54, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Good ideas. Cirt (talk) 08:56, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
I have crated a stub article. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 23:23, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Sources checking

All of the scientology-related Wikipedia articles seem to contain unverifiable sources of low quality. Many are attack websites that to not cite verifiable sources, and sites of the Church of Scientology are also of low quality concerning Hubbard's life or the founding of the church.

Articles needed source verification

The preceding comment by User:AndroidCat in 2007 had been left at Wikipedia:WikiProject Scientology/History Article Project I think it was meant to be left here. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 09:26, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

I had been working on cleaning up some of these, here: User:Durova/Questionable Scientology inline citations. Cirt (talk) 09:32, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

AfD

You might be interested in this AfD of an article on a Scientology defender: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dean M. Kelley Northwestgnome (talk) 19:31, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Pageview stats

After a recent request, I added WikiProject Scientology to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by http://stats.grok.se/en/ but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at Wikipedia:WikiProject Scientology/Popular pages.

The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. I can also get provide the full data for any project covered by the bot if requested, though I normally don't keep it for much longer than a couple weeks after the list is generated. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! Mr.Z-man 04:35, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much! Cirt (talk) 04:38, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
The data can be used to give an idea as to which articles need further work. I feel that the pages with the highest number of page views should have a better article assessment rating. Having said that I would like to see them at Class A or better! -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 04:49, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Scientology in Germany

An editor has expressed concerns regarding the neutrality of the above article, as well as of one of its main contributors. Additional eyes on the article and discussion are more than welcome. John Carter (talk) 14:18, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Reactive mind

Nominated for deletion by RUL3R (talk · contribs). Cirt (talk) 14:39, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Mark Rathbun and Mike Rinder in special report on Scientology and David Miscavige

First article in series
Overall report page for multiple articles

Sources to be included in this article. Cirt (talk) 06:00, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

There are a few important changes to the popular pages system. A quick summary:

  • The "importance" ranking (for projects that use it) will be included in the lists along with assessment.
  • The default list size has been lowered to 500 entries (from 1000)
  • I've set up a project on the Toolserver for the popular pages - tools:~alexz/pop/.
    • This includes a page to view the results for projects, including the in-progress results from the current month. Currently this can only show the results from a single project in one month. Features to see multiple projects or multiple months may be added later.
    • This includes a new interface for making requests to add a new project to the list.
    • There is also a form to request a change to the configuration for a project. Currently the configurable options are the size of the on-wiki list and the project subpage used for the list.
  • The on-wiki list should be generated and posted in a more timely and consistent manner than before.
  • The data is now retained indefinitely.
  • The script used to generate the pages has changed. The output should be the same. Please report any apparent inconsistencies (see below).
  • Bugs and feature requests should be reported using the Toolserver's bug tracker for "alexz's tools" - [4]

-- Mr.Z-man 00:33, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Military career of L. Ron Hubbard

Military career of L. Ron Hubbard has recently achieved good article status and is now being considered for featured article status. Input from editors would be very welcome. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Military career of L. Ron Hubbard/archive1. -- ChrisO (talk) 00:55, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Article alerts

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:39, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

This has been  Done. Cirt (talk) 01:06, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Strength in their numbers: More Church of Scientology defectors step forward with accounts of abuse

Additional source for use in article. Corroborated with additional accounts from other individuals at [5], as well as multiple other WP:RS secondary sources. Cirt (talk) 06:08, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Call for editors to help manage religion related content

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Religion#Coordination of activity. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 19:08, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice. Cirt (talk) 01:06, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Article proposed for rename

Please see Talk:Scientology_controversies#Proposed_rename. Cirt (talk) 14:49, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

St. Petersburg Times reporter Tom Tobin to appear Thursday in Scientology investigation by ABC's Nightline

Cirt (talk) 21:27, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

ABC News Nightline

Source for material for addition to related articles. Cirt (talk) 20:03, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Scientology book?

User:Headbomb has been gracious enough to tag all the articles for the Category:Book-Class Religion articles, and, unfortunately, I don't see a Scientology book there. Anyone interested in developing one? John Carter (talk) 18:58, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Not really but others of course feel free. Cirt (talk) 02:27, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Scientology in Russia

I created Scientology in Russia. It was a quick cut'n'paste job. It needs work. Considering the important case in the European Court of Human Rights case it really does deserve a standalone article. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 11:12, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Surveillance in a New Religious Movement: Scientology as a Case Study

Topics covered include:

Cirt (talk) 14:40, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Public response to Scientology advertising

“Typically when a logo or advertiser name appears in an ad there’s a decline in interest and/or believability. However, I have never seen such a precipitous decline in curves as was seen when the Scientology identification was shown on the screen,” noted Glenn Kessler, president and CEO, HCD Research. Interesting stuff. Cirt (talk) 13:39, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Request for comment

Please see Talk:Scientology_controversies#RfC:_Alleged_oppression_of_Scientologists_in_Germany. Cirt (talk) 13:43, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

AFD

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Volney Mathison. Cirt (talk) 11:18, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:53, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Request for comment on Biographies of living people

Hello Wikiproject! Currently there is a discussion which will decide whether wikipedia will delete 49,000 articles about a living person without references, here:

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Since biographies of living people covers so many topics, many wikiproject topics will be effected.

The two opposing positions which have the most support is:

  1. supports the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, User:Jehochman
  2. opposes the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, except in limited circumstances, User:Collect

Comments are welcome. Keep in mind that by default, editor's comments are hidden. Simply press edit next to the section to add your comment.

Please keep in mind that at this point, it seems that editors support deleting unreferenced BLP articles if they are not sourced, so your project may want to source these articles as soon as possible. See the next, message, which may help.

Tools to help your project with unreferenced Biographies of living people

List of cleanup articles for your project

If you don't already have Cleanup listings, Cleanup listings is a bot which collects all tagged unreferenced biographies of living people, plus other lists onto one page in your project.

It is very easy to add to your project: simply add a template to a page of your project! Instructions

A list of examples is here

Moving unreferenced blp articles to special "incubation pages"

If you are interested in moving unreferenced blp articles that your project covers, to a special "incubation page", contact me, User talk:Ikip

Watchlisting all unreferenced articles

If you are interested in watchlisting all of the unreferenced articles once you install Cleanup_listings, contact me, User talk:Ikip

Ikip 09:09, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

The New York Times - Breaking With Scientology

The New York Times, page A1. The New York Times is a WP:RS source for info. This is a good source for inclusion in relevant articles. Cirt (talk) 05:25, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

The Rundown Truth: Scientology Changes Strategy in War with Media

Hugh B. Urban is a professor of religious studies at Ohio State University. This article is a good source of info on multiple topics. -- Cirt (talk) 19:24, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Scientology: A History of Violence

See postings at news.turner.com and www.newsonnews.net/cnn

In a special series beginning Monday, March 29th, CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360° takes a close and revealing look at the leadership of the worldwide church of Scientology. The week-long series, Scientology: A History of Violence, will examine allegations that Scientology leader David Miscavige has for years beaten, kicked and choked top members of the church. These are allegations the church aggressively denies, saying violence from inside came from those making the claim.

This series on the CNN program Anderson Cooper 360 starting March 29, 2010 will have a good deal of WP:RS source material. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 15:33, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced living people articles bot

User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects provides a list, updated daily, of unreferenced living people articles (BLPs) related to your project. There has been a lot of discussion recently about deleting these unreferenced articles, so it is important that these articles are referenced.

The unreferenced articles related to your project can be found at >>>Wikipedia:WikiProject Scientology/Archive 4/Unreferenced BLPs<<<

If you do not want this wikiproject to participate, please add your project name to this list.

Thank you.

Update: Wikipedia:WikiProject Scientology/Archive 4/Unreferenced BLPs has been created. This list, which is updated by User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects daily, will allow your wikiproject to quickly identify unreferenced living person articles.
There maybe no or few articles on this new Unreferenced BLPs page. To increase the overall number of articles in your project with another bot, you can sign up for User:Xenobot_Mk_V#Instructions.
If you have any questions or concerns, visit User talk:DASHBot/Wikiprojects. Okip 23:36, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

A Scientology Glossary?

A question for debate: Would a Scientology Glossary, in list form or such, be helpful to readers not experienced in the field? Especially abbreviations are a little confusing to "newbies" in the subject at times. Yes, yes, I know, Wikipedia is not a dictionary, but there are quite a few glossaries already (they even have their own category) and so I thought it might be interesting to "word clear" (as a Scientologist would say) things like ARC/KRC, PTS/SP, OT, HCO, HCOB, HCOPL, FLB, FEO, Thetan, Overt, Knowledge Report etc. What does everyone think?

--Newbiepedian (talk · contribs) 09:11, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

This is a start I made: Glossary.--Newbiepedian User talk:Newbiepedian 11:34, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
There is an existing article, that could use a lot of improvement. Please see, Scientology terminology. -- Cirt (talk) 21:23, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
That looks more like a description of Scientology terminology to me, than an actual list. You can't have a proper article and a very long list in one article, can you?--Newbiepedian 09:05, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps a list page called List of Scientology terms. -- Cirt (talk) 13:09, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Downtown Medical

Surely this isn't a starter class article any more? There are a few on the list that seem to have evolved. Is there any way I can help with the classification process? PanydThe muffin is not subtle 21:08, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

That one is probably up to C-class quality rating at this point in time. -- Cirt (talk) 21:10, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Russia bans writings by Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard

Sources, for info to add to this article. -- Cirt (talk) 20:12, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Category deletion discussion

It's Time to End the Church of Scientology's Tax Exempt Status

Hassan, Steven (April 28, 2010). "It's Time to End the Church of Scientology's Tax Exempt Status". The Huffington Post. HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. Retrieved 2010-04-28. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)

A most interesting piece by notable cult expert, Steven Hassan. -- Cirt (talk) 21:11, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Category deletion discussion

Relevant AFD discussion

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kaja Bordevich Ballo. Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 00:43, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Good article template

Consensus has been reached to use the template:

Please feel free to add it to all WP:GA rated articles within this WikiProject, in the same manner of placement used as {{featured article}}. Thanks for all of your quality improvement work within the topic of this WikiProject! :) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 15:12, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

RFC at List of Scientologists

Request for Comment at page, List of Scientologists. Please see discussion on talk page, at "RfC: Should people be self-proclaimed Scientologists in order to be included on this list?" Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 02:57, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Leo Ryan GA Sweeps: On Hold

I have reviewed Leo Ryan for GA Sweeps to determine if it still qualifies as a Good Article. In reviewing the article I have found several issues, which I have detailed here. Since the article falls under the scope of this project, I figured you would be interested in contributing to further improve the article. Please comment there to help the article maintain its GA status. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib)

This has since been  Done. -- Cirt (talk) 15:54, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Talk:The_Way_to_Happiness#Precepts

Issue with user first adding completely unsourced info, then primary-sourced info. On these controversial articles, we should avoid primary sources, and stick to secondary sources. Please see discussion, at Talk:The_Way_to_Happiness#Precepts. -- Cirt (talk) 14:28, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Relevant AFD discussion page

Disruption at article, "Operation Snow White"

Please see repeated edits by R3ap3R.inc (talk · contribs), replacing the word "Church" to refer to Scientology, instead adding the word "cult".

  1. [8], and
  2. [9]
  • It is likely that I am going to report this user to Arbitration Enforcement, however, in the interim I will not revert the user's edit another time. Perhaps other users would like to see if the word "cult" should remain in the article in the intervening time, to refer to Scientology.

Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 23:16, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Scientology articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Scientology articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 23:35, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Relevant AFD - The Bridge (2006 drama)

Relevant AFD, please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Bridge (2006 drama). -- Cirt (talk) 06:14, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

AFD relevant to this project - Jessica Feshbach

Ongoing AFD deletion discussion for this article, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jessica Rodriguez (3rd nomination). Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 09:33, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Outlines on religions

The Transhumanist 19:06, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, there is History of Scientology, and Timeline of Scientology... -- Cirt (talk) 00:25, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject cleanup listing

I have created together with Smallman12q a toolserver tool that shows a weekly-updated list of cleanup categories for WikiProjects, that can be used as a replacement for WolterBot and this WikiProject is among those that are already included (because it is a member of Category:WolterBot cleanup listing subscriptions). See the tool's wiki page, this project's listing in one big table or by categories and the index of WikiProjects. Svick (talk) 21:28, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

AFD of Symbols of Scientology 2nd nomination

Interested in Editors opinions that are part of the project or just interested in Scientology in General. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Symbols of Scientology (2nd nomination) 04:24, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Proposed annual interreligious discussion

I have proposed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Religion#Annual meeting? that we maybe create a page for the discussion of all religious topics on an annual basis. The topics might include new developments in the past year regarding interreligious matters, possible cooperation on contentious or important material, etc. Any and all input is more than welcome. John Carter (talk) 19:24, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

www.truthaboutscientology.com usage in BLPs

Please see Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#www.truthaboutscientology.com_usage_in_BLPs. -- Cirt (talk) 04:37, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

AFD Standard Tech

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Standard Tech. -- Cirt (talk) 08:36, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

In this ANI thread (see the second and third sections), I have expressed my concerns about the actions of an admin closely associated with Scientology-related articles. Since it is a pattern of actions rather than actions on a specific article, I feel that ANI is the most appropriate place to start the discussion. Your input would be appreciated, since Scientology is not one of my subject areas. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 21:58, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Death of Stacy Meyer

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stacy Meyer (2nd nomination). Thank you, -- Cirt (talk) 19:20, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Quality improvement project - Slaves of Sleep by L. Ron Hubbard

I am going to try to work on a quality improvement project - Slaves of Sleep by L. Ron Hubbard. It'd be nice to see if there is enough source coverage to fully cover the topic for eventual improvement to GA quality. (Right now it'd simply be nice to flesh it out a bit more with additional WP:RS secondary sources.) Help would be appreciated - if you'd like to collaborate on this project and pitch in somehow, please post to Talk:Slaves of Sleep. Thank you for your time! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 22:20, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of deaths related to Scientology The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 22:09, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Alexandra Powers

In the Alexandra Powers article I created I found a website that says she is in Scientology. Here's the website: http://www.truthaboutscientology.com/stats/by-name/a/alexandra-powers.html Should this be used as a reference in the article? Please let me know. Neptunekh2 (talk) 15:55, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Not an appropriate source. Also, a user asked me to clean up this page - but I would appreciate it if others could give it some attention. Thank you, -- Cirt (talk) 14:15, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Possible source

I found a document from the Association for Progressive Communications:

The point of view in the document is critical of the church. It could be used to source aspects related to the COS and the internet, or of this group's views of Scientology WhisperToMe (talk) 03:03, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Quite interesting, thank you. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 14:16, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposed Edits

Hello everyone! I’ve proposed some edits on the David Miscavige page and have not see any response from an admin yet. Just wanted to follow up on my proposed edits – I do believe there is much we can still do to improve the balance and NPOV of the said article.

See my latest post here: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:David_Miscavige

Looking forward to feedback. Thanks! NestleNW911 (talk) 00:58, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Questionable reference

Since were on the subject of references. On Tom Cruise: An Unauthorized Biography as a reference:

I've seen on that the book Tom Cruise: An_Unauthorized Biography has been questioned as a resource of information for Scientology articles. I discovered it is being used as a major reference in a Scientologist's page: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:Michael_Doven

I can understand that one may not want to entirely discount it as a resource, but maybe we can put it in proper context?

On http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:Andrew_Morton_(writer): I propose to add this statement to the last paragraph on the “Tom Cruise: An Unauthorized Biography” section - "Morton says the book is not being published in Britain, where he lives, because British libel laws favor plaintiffs in libel cases far more than they do in the USA." (I believe that his reaction would make this section, especially the statement concerning libel laws, stronger – after all, it is an article about Morton as an author. It provides a more balanced perspective of the fact.) The source of this statement is Bob Minzesheimer's Jan 15 2008 article in USA Today.

Looking forward to your feedback. NestleNW911 (talk) 01:54, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

L Ron Hubbard FA Candidacy

Is Currently up for Featured article review at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/L. Ron Hubbard/archive2 The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 18:29, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

State of the Wikiproject

  • This wikiproject: 7.4% of articles are GA or FA quality.
  • English Wikipedia as a whole: 0.4% are GA or FA quality.

I haven't precise figures for this, but there seems to have been a recent increase in proportion, partly due to article improvements by this Wikiproject or by uninvolved editors, and partly due to deletion or merging of lower-quality articles by the WP:Neutrality in Scientology group. MartinPoulter (talk) 22:42, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Featured article review for Katie Holmes

I have nominated Katie Holmes for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Brad (talk) 17:17, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Why no Debbie Cook article?

It would seem to be time, considering that she's been the subject of a full-length profile on Nightline. Debbie Cook is somebody completely different... AnonMoos (talk) 22:12, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

TashiD removing Scientology info

Hi, guys! User:TashiD removed info about Scientology connections from e.Republic: http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=E.Republic&diff=483496335&oldid=473558040 - Is this justified? WhisperToMe (talk) 11:20, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

No, is the answer to that. But let's not use charged rhetoric. I don't think anyone is 'damanding' we put the portal in. It's just that given the light of reality it seems to be the best option. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 19:08, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

LMP leaves scientology

Hi folks. Just an FYI that a "rumor" is circulating that Lisa Marie Presley has left the Church of Scientology based on lyrics for a new song on her new album and a "non-denial denial" interview recently[10]. Someone recently added some content to her article, I added a citation needed tag, but, I'm worried that whether you hope she leaves or not, we have the legit facts and not just some rumor mill blogs and so forth up there :) Even if they are from some fairly reliable sources. So...perhaps keep your eyes peeled at the LMP article! Sarah (talk) 05:29, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Arbitration Committee motion

This is a courtesy notification that a motion has passed the Arbitration Committee concerning the application of discretionary sanctions to Scientology pages. The WikiProject template has been edited to reflect this change.

Best, Lord Roem (talk) 02:14, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Proposed MOS for Religion

There is now a proposed general Manual of Style for Religion and other articles relating to ethoses or belief systems at Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion/Manual of style. Any input would be welcome. I personally believe at least one of the reasons why many articles in this field have been as contentious as they have been is because of lack of such guidelines, and would very much welcome any input from others to help come up with some generally acceptable solutions to some of these problems. John Carter (talk) 22:04, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

By Request, What Do You Want?

Under the Scientology article, I guess one should be able ALL the relevant facts. This includes also "Aims of Scientology". Toward Neusner, I've made some commenting. So I am here for criticism and I want you to know that I'm open to this criticism. So if I am to be blamed for being biased, I want the accuser to run the same RISK!!! John Carter, come on, let's have it, please!! LFOlsnes-Lea (talk) 20:34, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Minister Louis Farrakhan of the Nation Of Islam is a Dianetics believer

Members of this group should therefore keep an eye also on this development, which began in 2005 and was made public in 2010. Farrakhan's page has a section on his conversion to Dianetics, and I am proposing it be updated to 2013(the article as a whole is outdated). I have also proposed a "Nation Of Islam and Dianetics" section be added to the NOI page and/Or it's history page. The NOI page doesn't have anything about the last three years of the NOI and it's "merging" with Dianetics under Minister Farrakhan. Search "Farrakhan Scientology" on YouTube for more information, or on Google if you need citeable sourcing. Also go to their official media page www.finalcall.com and search for dianetics. This should be "kept an eye on" by editors to this project, but I am NOT proposing the relevant articles be added to this project or the Scientology template as yet. It just needs to be watched. Colliric (talk) 10:50, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Is there a manual of style?

The Latter Day Saints WikiProject has a Manual of style, which answers questions such as "when is it appropriate or not to use 'Mormon', 'LDS', 'Latter-day' and 'Latter Day'".

Does this WikiProject have anything like this? For example, are there any suggestions on when to use "org", "organization", "church", "Church", "religion", "cult" or "sect"? I see all of these terms around Scientology and I find it very messy. In some cases it's blatantly wrong; for example the current version of the E-Meter article says that the device carries a label that says: "By itself, this meter does nothing. It is solely for the guide of Ministers of the sect in Confessionals and pastoral counseling". I might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that Scientology doesn't call itself a "sect". (I suspect search-and-replace or an over-excited critic.)

Or things like when to use "Dianetics", "Scientology", "Dianetics and Scientology", "Church of Scientology", etc. These are related, but different terms, and sticking to a consistent style guide would be helpful to readers and writers.

Any thoughts? --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 18:22, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Barbara Schwarz

What happened to the article? Zambelo; talk 23:15, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to Wikimedia Tool Labs. The code has changed significantly from the Toolserver version, but users should notice few differences. Please take a moment to look over your project's list for any anomalies, such as pages that you expect to see that are missing or pages that seem to have more views than expected. Note that unlike other tools, this tool aggregates all views from redirects, which means it will typically have higher numbers. (For January 2014 specifically, 35 hours of data is missing from the WMF data, which was approximated from other dates. For most articles, this should yield a more accurate number. However, a few articles, like ones featured on the Main Page, may be off).

Web tools, to replace the ones at tools:~alexz/pop, will become available over the next few weeks at toollabs:popularpages. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The tool to view historical data is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available now (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. OAuth is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs.

If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the updated FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Mr.Z-bot (talk) (for Mr.Z-man) 05:24, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

I read on Wikipedia that the Arbitration Committee determined that Church of Scientology IP addresses should be blocked from editing pages concerning them. Scientologists would most likely be more informed about Scientology than non-Scientologists and should therefore be permitted to edit articles concerning them. If a Scientologist vandalizes an article due to bias, s/he should have her/his edits reverted and be subject to the same policies as other users. An entire community, those who edit from the Church, should not be banned or blocked due to the actions of some. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidoko99 (talk • contribs) 15:18, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

The Arbitration Committee decision hinged largely on their estimation (after a lengthy review) of whether or not Scientology, and Scientologists, were capable of editing articles in a neutral manner. Avenues are available for you to voice your disagreement with this ruling. However, this is not the place for that objection. As far as I am aware, there is nobody here who has the power to overrule an Arbitration Committee decision. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 20:43, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Where can I appeal this decision, then? User:Davidoko99Tell me the truth. 4:02 PM US Central Time
This would be your first port of call on that journey. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 12:01, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:48, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

WP:VG comments subpages cleanup

Hi, there is currently a discussion taking place at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#VG comments subpages regarding whether it would be acceptable to permanently shift all comments subpages associated with WP:VG articles into talk. This shift would follow the recommended approach given at WP:DCS. The WikiProject Scientology articles that would be affected by this action are these:

If you have objections related specifically to WikiProject Scientology's use of these subpages, please make this clear at the discussion so that other unrelated talk pages can be cleaned up where appropriate. Thank you. -Thibbs (talk) 15:57, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

"We Stand Tall"

Project members are invited to work on "We Stand Tall", which was recently featured in Going Clear and would probably be easy to expand and promote to GA status. ---Another Believer (Talk) 23:06, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Request for input in discussion forum

Given the closely linked subjects of the various religion, mythology, and philosophy groups, it seems to me that we might benefit from having some sort of regular topical discussion forum to discuss the relevant content. I have put together the beginnings of an outline for such discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion/2011 meeting, and would very much appreciate the input of any interested editors. I am thinking that it might run over two months, the first of which would be to bring forward and discuss the current state of the content, and the second for perhaps some more focused discussion on what, if any, specific efforts might be taken in the near future. Any and all input is more than welcome. John Carter (talk)

Automated message by Project Messenger Bot from John Carter at 15:44, 5 April 2011

Help expand Cannabis and Scientology (marijuana)

I started a section at Cannabis and religion to cover Scientology's stance on cannabis/marijuana (to my understanding, they're generally opposed), but I'd welcome any additional input from the experts here. Thanks! Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 02:18, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject Scientology/Archive 4/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject Scientology.

We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:

  • The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
  • The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
  • The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject Scientology, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Corin Nemec

Corin Nemec (an actor) was recently identified in his biography as being a lifelong adherent of Scientology. I removed this claim because it was unsourced, and so far at least, no one has re-added it. If anyone has a reliable published source — preferably confirming not only that Nemec is a Scientologist, but also that he self-identifies as a Scientologist and his affiliation with Scientology is relevant to his public life or notability (see WP:BLP) — then by all means go ahead and add this piece of information back. Otherwise, as I understand the BLP policy, not only should any mention of Scientology be kept out of this article, but the indications on the article's talk page (i.e., the link to this WikiProject, as well as the discretionary sanctions notice) should be removed as well. I'm acting more slowly and deliberately here than might be appropriate for most BLP issues because I really, really do not want to set off an edit war, but IMO the talk page notice ought to be removed ASAP unless a properly sourced (and relevant) piece of info can be re-added to the article right away. Thanks. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 04:44, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject collaboration notice from the Portals WikiProject

The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.

Portals are being redesigned.

The new design features are being applied to existing portals.

At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template {{Transclude lead excerpt}}.

The discussion about this can be found here.

Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.

Background

On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.

There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.

So far, 84 editors have joined.

If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.

If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.

Thank you.    — The Transhumanist   07:54, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

A new newsletter directory is out!

A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.

– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Portal:Scientology

Portal:Scientology, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Scientology and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Portal:Scientology during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:04, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Battlefield Earth FA review

I have nominated Battlefield Earth (film) for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. 👨x🐱 (talk) 12:54, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Scientology and sexual orientation#Requested move 8 August 2021

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Scientology and sexual orientation#Requested move 8 August 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 18:29, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sources

Main page: User:Headbomb/unreliable

I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like

  • John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)

and turns it into something like

It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Re-activate wikiproject

I am trying to re-activate the Scientology wikiproject. If anyone is interested in discussing issues with any of the scientology topics, please leave a message here on the project talk page. Everyone's help is appreciated. Grorp (talk) 03:03, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

I restored the assessment table

It took a bit of work, but I was able to restore the colorful article assessment table at Wikipedia:WikiProject Scientology/Assessment. (I posted instructions for others on my talk page.) Grorp (talk) 05:00, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for doing this! MartinPoulter (talk) 14:13, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Guardian's Office

Somehow this has slipped through the cracks and we have no real article for the Guardian's Office.

Guardian's Office redirects to Office of Special Affairs, which doesn't mention the FBI raid and the resulting criminal trial, and instead merely mentions the GO "was disbanded in 1983" as if it was simply an administrative reorganization of departments.

Articles Mary Sue Hubbard and Operation Snow White describe the raid and trial in depth. But what reader would find the content there if they were searching for the Guardian's Office?

We need a top-level article named Guardian's Office which includes a description of its position within the Church of Scientology network, what was its mission and what sort of work it performed, a link to sub-article List of Guardian's Office operations, a description of the FBI raid, a description of the criminal trial and the result of the trial, and the overthrow of the GO by David Miscavige (with Mike Rinder), and the subsequent establishment of the Office of Special Affairs (OSA).

Grorp (talk) 00:02, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Redirects

There are dozens of redirects that are "hidden" from view because the Wikipedia search function just isn't finding them unless you know their name. You cannot use "What links here?" because the Scientology navbar template adds far too many articles to the linked-list to be a useful function.

Most of the redirects have not been tagged on their talk page for WikiProject Scientology, and many don't even have a talk page (which I create). I have been tagging these talk pages whenever I come across them. It is helpful to have them tagged because then they will show up in the assessments table where they can be found with a single click, and managed en masse.

The tag you want to use for redirects is: {{WikiProject Scientology|class=Redirect|importance=Low}}

For example, just today I came across three redirects for the Scientology term preclear, but each was directed to a different target:

I'm sending them all to go to Auditing (Scientology) because that article discusses preclears in far more detail than the other target articles. Grorp (talk) 00:57, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

  1. ^ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvMoSsuRVW8
  2. ^ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smZgZPxUFV4
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Scientology/Archive_4&oldid=1179279422"