| Revision as of 22:53, 8 December 2009 editPelleSmith (talk | contribs)7,078 edits →Notability: Wong source being used rather oddly← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 08:38, 28 February 2024 edit undoCewbot (talk | contribs)Bots7,839,911 editsm Maintain {{WPBS}}: 3 WikiProject templates. Keep majority rating "Start" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 3 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Psychology}}, {{WikiProject Books}}, {{WikiProject Religion}}. Remove 1 deprecated parameter: importance.Tag: Talk banner shell conversion |
| (47 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=Start|1 = |
|
⚫ |
{{WikiProject Psychology|importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Books|needs-infobox=No}} |
|
⚫ |
{{WikiProject Religion|importance=Low|NRM=yes|NRMImp=Mid}} |
|
⚫ |
}} |
|
⚫ |
{{DYK talk|20 September|2009|... that prior to writing the book ''''']''''', Mary Alice Chrnalogar had belonged to the religious group ]?}} |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|maxarchivesize = 250K |
|
|maxarchivesize = 250K |
| Line 6: |
Line 13: |
|
|archive = Talk:Twisted Scriptures/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|archive = Talk:Twisted Scriptures/Archive %(counter)d |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
{{talkheader}} |
|
|
{{WikiProjectBanners |
|
| ⚫ |
|1 = {{WikiProject Psychology|class=Start|importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{WPBooks|class=Start|importance=Low|needs-infobox=No}} |
|
| ⚫ |
{{WPReligion|class=Start|importance=Low|NRM=yes|NRMImp=Mid}} |
|
| ⚫ |
}} |
|
| ⚫ |
{{dyktalk|20 September|2009|{{*mp}}... that prior to writing the book ''''']''''', Mary Alice Chrnalogar had belonged to the religious group ]?}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Note == |
|
== OTRS received == |
|
|
|
|
|
The ] has received an email (]), forwarding correspondence which: |
|
|
:"...confirms that James A. Cox, Editor-in-Chief of Midwest Book Review, confirms the accuracy and citation for cite: |
|
|
|
|
|
:Cox, James A. (January 1997). "Twisted Scriptures: A Path to Freedom from Abusive Churches". Midwest Book Review (Oregon, Wisconsin)." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The forwarded email was from James A. Cox himself. |
|
Will have another source, '']'' (), just want to track down full cite. ''']''' (]) 22:31, 18 September 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, |
|
== Notability == |
|
|
|
<span style="font-family:Arial;"> ] (])</span> 10:42, 14 December 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
:Thank you, ''']''' (]) 13:31, 14 December 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
::Thanks for that news, but I'm unsure why anyone (including Mr. Cox) was bothered with this since no one has questioned the accuracy of this citation.] (]) 15:13, 14 December 2009 (UTC) |
|
Does this book meet ]? It clearly fails 2-5, but does it meet #1? (copied from policy page) |
|
|
# The book has been the subject<ref name="subject">The "subject" of a work means non-trivial treatment and excludes mere mention of the book, its author or of its publication, price listings and other nonsubstantive detail treatment.</ref> of multiple, non-trivial<ref name="nontrivial"/> published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself,<ref name="independent"/> with at least some of these works serving a general audience. This includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries and reviews. Some of these works should contain sufficient critical commentary to allow the article to ]. |
|
|
#* The immediately preceding criterion excludes media re-prints of press releases, flap copy, or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book.<ref name="selfpromotion"/> |
|
|
I see a book review from ''What Magazine'' (??), and two mentions (possibly reviews?) in small news papers in Indiana and Nebraska. Can someone confirm that the treatment in the small news papers is non-trivial, and what is ''What Magazine''?] (]) 21:36, 8 December 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:::On a related note, I reposted a more general question than previously about the Midwest Book Review at the . Their credibility as independent reviewers of books is not looking so good at the moment.] (]) 15:29, 14 December 2009 (UTC) |
|
==Use of sources== |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
::::Coming here from the discussion at WP:RSN, I agree with Pelle that verifying the publication there is irrelevant, because the reviews in that publication do not show notability. amazon very often includes and excerpts (without exact references) reviews from a variety of sources--the actual source its reliability evaluated--it's not the worse for being reprinted in amazon, and it's no better. In this case, it's close to zero for either the opinion presented or the implications of it being reviewed there in terms of notability. I think the review should not be used here, especially since there are better sources. BTW, who is asserted to having written that particular review? Cox, as the editor? On the basis of not just my own view, but the general discussion at WP:RS, I am removing it. In fact, where the book was reviewed doesn't in general belong in the lede of an article on a book at all, unless a particular review is exceptionally important, so I am removing the other ones from the lede also (but not from the article). If you want to, think of this as a 3O. ''']''' (]) 04:00, 18 December 2009 (UTC) |
|
This regards the following: |
|
|
|
:::::Okay, I will think of it as a ]. Thank you, ''']''' (]) 14:02, 18 December 2009 (UTC) |
|
*Chrnalogar points out that mind control does not need to occur only with sever tactics, writing: "All that's needed is an environment where the information can be controlled, and more importantly, the way people perceive that information."<ref name="wong">{{cite journal | last =Wong | first =Catherine | title =St. Thomas on Deprogramming: Is It Justifiable? | journal =The Catholic Lawyer | volume =39 Catholic Law | issue =81 | publisher =The St. Thomas More Institute for Legal Research of St. John's University School of Law | date =Summer / Fall, 1999 }}</ref> She cites mind control characteristics identified by ], and asserts that only six of his "psychological themes" are required in order to manipulate followers in a cult.<ref name="wong" /> |
|
|
Wong does not discuss this book in her law article but quotes Chrnalogar and Delgado '''in a footnote''' to exemplify the fact that "he efficacy of deprogramming is based on the assumption that cult members are unwitting victims of brainwashing and mind control." Since when do we quote footnotes like this in our entries? Chrnalogar's mention in Wong is basically as a speck in the sea of deprogramming and anti-cult activity.] (]) 22:53, 8 December 2009 (UTC) |
|
The forwarded email was from James A. Cox himself.
