Talk:Disconnection

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Disconnection article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite, and welcoming to new users Assume good faith Avoid personal attacks For disputes, seek dispute resolution	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability
Archives: 1

This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details.

WikiProject Scientology

(Rated Start-class, High-importance)

Scientology portal

This article is supported by WikiProject Scientology, a collaborative effort to help develop and improve Wikipedia's coverage of Scientology. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on Scientology-related topics. See WikiProject Scientology and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ.

Start

This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

	All articles related to Scientology are subject to sanctions imposed by the Arbitration Committee
See the Scientology arbitration case Any current or future editor who makes substantial edits to any Scientology-related articles or discussions on any page is directed: To edit on these from only a single user account, which shall be the user's sole or main account, unless the user has previously sought and obtained permission from the Arbitration Committee to operate a legitimate second account; To edit only through a conventional internet service provider and not through any form of proxy configuration; To edit in accordance with all Wikipedia policies and to refrain from any form of advocacy concerning any external controversy, dispute, allegation, or proceeding; and To disclose on the relevant talk pages any circumstances (but not including personal identifying information) that constitute or may reasonably be perceived as constituting a conflict of interest with respect to that page. If any editor fails to comply with the spirit or letter of these instructions, any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, ban any editor from editing within the Scientology topic. Prior to topic banning the editor, the administrator will leave a message on the editor's talk page, linking to this paragraph, warning the editor that a topic ban is contemplated and outlining the behaviours for which it is contemplated. If the editor fails to heed the warning, the editor may be topic banned, initially, for three months, then with additional topic bans increasing in duration to a maximum of one year.

WikiProject Religion

(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)

Religion portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.

Start

This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Sociology

(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)

Sociology portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.

Start

This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Psychology

(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)

Psychology portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.

Start

This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Media

(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)

Journalism portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.

Start

This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Media To-do List:

Here are some tasks you can do:

Article requests: Myanmar News Agency, Lisa Sylvester (CNN reporter)
Cleanup: Media influence, Video game culture
NPOV: Content (media and publishing)
Verify: Multimedia, Alternative media, Alternative newspaper

[edit] Examples of applications

Is there really a need for such a large amount of examples? I would have thought that two or three would have sufficed. The division between 60's & 80's onwards seems arbitrary. 93.107.142.64 (talk) 10:48, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

It is a good idea, particularly as the organization denies this occurs. -- Cirt (talk) 15:41, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Two or three well referenced examples demonstrates just as well that this occurs as 10 - 15. A lot of the examples mentioned amount to hearsay, and these detract from the overall message. 109.77.22.14 (talk) 00:20, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Not really. Particularly as the organization has quite vociferously attempted to deny this happens at all. -- Cirt (talk) 01:19, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the IP editors, but not on grounds of having too much examples, but on grounds of WP:NOT. Wikipedia does not have to prove a point (like the application of Disconnection), and many Scientology-related articles bordeline on WP:SOAP, so, having 20-30 examples is a bit much (and I think saying otherwise also borderlines WP:LAWYER). I concede with Cirt that it is not necessary to remove so many examples. But some, I believe, can be removed without violating the integrity of the article. > RUL3R^>trolling_>vandalism 01:57, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I accept that the article is becoming too much like a list and welcome suggestions for improving it. However, I don't think deleting lots of content is the way. The two sections for 60s and 80s onwards are not arbitrary: the policy section explains that there have been two phases when the policy has been operating, so naturally the examples section should address that. The examples that are included are there because they are notable, having been mentioned in mainstream news sources. If there were only one or two, that would convey quite a different message from there being 20-30. This article aims to be a summary of all the notable published sources on the topic, with appropriate weight. Anyone who thinks it's slanted is welcome to provide additional reliable sources. MartinPoulter (talk) 14:23, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Putting the same point another way, it seems the way to avoid WP:SOAP is to get as diverse a set of reliable sources as possible, and summarise them in the article. This is what the article seeks to do, but of course it would be great to have more sources. It would smell of SOAP to exclude sourced material because we don't like the conclusions some readers will draw from it. If we want to overrule the secondary sources on what's notable, we need a strong justification. MartinPoulter (talk) 15:16, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Taking that to its logical conclusion, articles of this type could have hundreds,perhaps thousands of examples, the line must be drawn somewhere. An accumulation of 20 -30 examples in a situation where someone denies something exists will always lead to a bias towards the view that it does exist. I am not a Scientologist, nor to I doubt that disconnection exists, I just think that a shorter list would make for a better article Quasihuman (talk) 22:08, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Yup, I support this. Probably npt reducing to 2-3 examples, but I think 10 selected are enough...I am a Scientologist and I have read about Disconnection on Scientology materials (I referenced the quoted paragraph to the book it comes from). But it is not official policy, or at least I don't find it to be. It is just a practice, exaggeratedly common given the statistics the Church uses on claims of the % of SPs in the general population. > RUL3R^>trolling_>vandalism 04:20, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I agree the article could be shorter and more readable. I'd like a non-arbitrary way to do this that isn't an excuse for someone to come along later and remove content they don't like. Would it be acceptable to write the content in a more condensed way? MartinPoulter (talk) 16:37, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

That seems also acceptable. > RUL3R^>trolling_>vandalism 23:32, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Disconnection

[edit] Examples of applications

Personal tools

Namespaces

Variants

Views

Actions

Search

Navigation

Interaction

Toolbox

Print/export