| Revision as of 08:14, 17 January 2013 editAndrewman327 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers34,252 edits →What is fundamentally wrong with this article: Response← Previous edit | Revision as of 11:26, 19 January 2013 edit undoDrg55 (talk | contribs)315 edits →What is fundamentally wrong with this articleNext edit → | ||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
| Scientology was established as a Church in 1954. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 06:53, 17 January 2013 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | Scientology was established as a Church in 1954. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 06:53, 17 January 2013 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | ||
| :There was no consensus for the non-neutral edits that you made so I reverted them. Janet Reitman addresses the connection between Dianetics and Scientology in her book, so I added a bridge sentence to address that concern. I can expand it if you'd like. I have not seen any reliable sources that indicate Hubbard living anything close to a "frugal lifestyle". In fact, several sources I've seen indicate that he had a private ship staffed by "Sea Org" members before he moved into hiding on his private ranch. More to the point, this article is about the business practices of Scientology, it is not an essay for a comparative religions class. If you would like to create ], you are free to do so. <span style="color:orange">]<sup>]</sup></span> 08:14, 17 January 2013 (UTC) | :There was no consensus for the non-neutral edits that you made so I reverted them. Janet Reitman addresses the connection between Dianetics and Scientology in her book, so I added a bridge sentence to address that concern. I can expand it if you'd like. I have not seen any reliable sources that indicate Hubbard living anything close to a "frugal lifestyle". In fact, several sources I've seen indicate that he had a private ship staffed by "Sea Org" members before he moved into hiding on his private ranch. More to the point, this article is about the business practices of Scientology, it is not an essay for a comparative religions class. If you would like to create ], you are free to do so. <span style="color:orange">]<sup>]</sup></span> 08:14, 17 January 2013 (UTC) | ||
| When you say "there was no consensus for the non-neutral edits that you made" (your edits of course being neutral), and I notice visitor stats spiking, are you discussing this article in another forum, perhaps Anonymous? As far as the "private ship", it was a devoted to Scientology activities. The lazy criticism of skeptics is to impute material motives when they all know that Hubbard devoted most of his waking hours to writing materials, teaching courses and administering Churches. Obviously we are going to have to reach a concensus on materials, but I don't know where you are going when you delete quotes I put in on the purpose of Organisations which directly relate to whether they are for financial purposes or what the goal is. This article is supposed to neutral and not libelous. As for Reitman, a rock and roll journalist is not a source. I'll give you a source about Hubbard being frugal, it is Marty Rathbun, a former high official of Scientology who is now at loggerheads with its current leader. | |||
| "Miscavige spent over seventy million dollars in Scientologists’ donations for an office building for himself and his personal support staff. Miscavige constantly altered orders for the building during construction, many times to upgrade material and finishes to the most expensive available, ordering the removal and destruction of what had been originally installed. Such profligate spending is contrary to countless finance policies of Hubbard, who was always extremely frugal in the spending of Church donations." (Point 29 of 31 Factors - please note I do not endorse the rest of Rathbuns claims which are highly colorful, but you wanted a reference and there it is. Rathbun, who has mounted an unsuccessful power struggle through mainstream media, also criticises Miscavige for diving trips in the Caribbean and maintaining residences around the world - which are relatively modest compared to even a local Archbishop's palace. | |||
| And before I revert your reinclusion of the quote about Dianetics, the point is that Hubbard was persuaded to present his original work as a science and then had interference in his researches into past lives which bridged it over into Scientology. So if the quote you put says in effect that he was galvanised to sell Dianetics as a religion in 1950 the facts are directly the opposite, and is why the main book published May 9,1950 is called "Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health". Alternatively if you still want to leave this in I take it you would accept a quote from Hubbard's lecture where he details this history?] (]) 11:26, 19 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
| == Link to 'Aurthur's Bookstore' ? == | == Link to 'Aurthur's Bookstore' ? == | ||
Revision as of 11:26, 19 January 2013
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Scientology as a business article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 30 days  |
 | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
What is fundamentally wrong with this article
Basically you do not show that the purpose of having money was purely for material ends and not the furtherence of the religion. As it happens Hubbard led a frugal life style, his home in England Saint Hill Manor was taken over for Church purposes early on and left to the Church in his will. He made plenty of money from his writing before and after Scientology such as his Mission Earth series which were New York Times best sellers. You will also find that most active Scientologists currently heavily donate to the Church for new buildings and outreach work as Patrons of the International Association of Scientologists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drg55 (talk • contribs) 04:59, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
I also took out the reference about starting a religion because:
'What you really ought to do is create a religion because it will be tax-free,' and at that point everyone in the room started chiming in with ideas for this new religion. So the idea was a Gestalt that Ron caught on to and assimilated the details. He then wrote it up as 'Dianetics: A New Science of the Mind' and sold it to John W. Campbell, Jr., who published it in Astounding Science Fiction in 1950.
This is a load of rubbish as Dianetics was not promoted as a religion, it had a board including an Navy Admiral. Hubbard had trouble with the Board because it wanted him to suppress his research into past lives. http://www.xenu.net/archive/books/apobs/bs3-2.htm
Scientology was established as a Church in 1954. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drg55 (talk • contribs) 06:53, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
- There was no consensus for the non-neutral edits that you made so I reverted them. Janet Reitman addresses the connection between Dianetics and Scientology in her book, so I added a bridge sentence to address that concern. I can expand it if you'd like. I have not seen any reliable sources that indicate Hubbard living anything close to a "frugal lifestyle". In fact, several sources I've seen indicate that he had a private ship staffed by "Sea Org" members before he moved into hiding on his private ranch. More to the point, this article is about the business practices of Scientology, it is not an essay for a comparative religions class. If you would like to create Scientology compared to other religions, you are free to do so. Andrew 08:14, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
When you say "there was no consensus for the non-neutral edits that you made" (your edits of course being neutral), and I notice visitor stats spiking, are you discussing this article in another forum, perhaps Anonymous? As far as the "private ship", it was a devoted to Scientology activities. The lazy criticism of skeptics is to impute material motives when they all know that Hubbard devoted most of his waking hours to writing materials, teaching courses and administering Churches. Obviously we are going to have to reach a concensus on materials, but I don't know where you are going when you delete quotes I put in on the purpose of Organisations which directly relate to whether they are for financial purposes or what the goal is. This article is supposed to neutral and not libelous. As for Reitman, a rock and roll journalist is not a source. I'll give you a source about Hubbard being frugal, it is Marty Rathbun, a former high official of Scientology who is now at loggerheads with its current leader.
"Miscavige spent over seventy million dollars in Scientologists’ donations for an office building for himself and his personal support staff. Miscavige constantly altered orders for the building during construction, many times to upgrade material and finishes to the most expensive available, ordering the removal and destruction of what had been originally installed. Such profligate spending is contrary to countless finance policies of Hubbard, who was always extremely frugal in the spending of Church donations." (Point 29 of 31 Factors - please note I do not endorse the rest of Rathbuns claims which are highly colorful, but you wanted a reference and there it is. Rathbun, who has mounted an unsuccessful power struggle through mainstream media, also criticises Miscavige for diving trips in the Caribbean and maintaining residences around the world - which are relatively modest compared to even a local Archbishop's palace.
And before I revert your reinclusion of the quote about Dianetics, the point is that Hubbard was persuaded to present his original work as a science and then had interference in his researches into past lives which bridged it over into Scientology. So if the quote you put says in effect that he was galvanised to sell Dianetics as a religion in 1950 the facts are directly the opposite, and is why the main book published May 9,1950 is called "Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health". Alternatively if you still want to leave this in I take it you would accept a quote from Hubbard's lecture where he details this history?Drg55 (talk) 11:26, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Link to 'Aurthur's Bookstore' ?
While traveling last week I was in the San Jose airport and stopped in 'Aurthur's Bookstore' and was surprised to see four L. Ron Hubbard title's with large red "NEW RELEASE" signs. The books were given prominent display space. Is this business owned by the Church of Scientology, or do they give these books away at such a price as to entice bookstores to push them and make a higher than average profit? I've been told that every sale of an L. Ron Hubbard title counts a a new member joining the 'Church'. Unsure if this is factual or not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.244.183.6 (talk) 03:55, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Comparison to Christianity
I just removed the section "Comparison to Christianity". It had not sources other than the Bible, which has nothing to say about Scientology. The section was hard to understand. If it is to be restored, it needs specific reliable sources that make the comparison and copyediting.Andrew (talk) 17:44, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
- I just performed an overhaul of the article and incorporated the reference to Christianity into a section that is more germane to the topic. Andrew (talk) 19:30, 20 December 2012 (UTC)