This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles 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.
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 pages 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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.
The entire article is one big unsourced, WP:OR violation. It should either be sourced meticulously, or cut down to a stub until it can be. Cirt (talk) 10:26, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
I think it should be deleted if it is not notable. There is nothing in the article that most readers would find interesting. The picture isn't even of the subject of the article. Steve Dufour (talk) 21:46, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
I didn't say it wasn't notable, it could very well be notable (Haven't done a search for sources, yet.) I just said it was unsourced in its present state, thus, the tag. Cirt (talk) 21:50, 29 February 2008 (UTC)