View text source at Wikipedia

Template talk:Scientology

I have added the Nation Of Islam due to their current existence as a Dianetics organisation.

[edit]

If there was a Dianetics template, then it would obviously fit more there. But I think it also fits here... This is the latest news about this from their own website: http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/National_News_2/article_9651.shtml

http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/National_News_2/article_8648.shtml

http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/Minister_Louis_Farrakhan_9/article_7648.shtml

They have over 1055 "Nation of Islam" Auditors now and have apparently done 82 thousand hours of auditing. Scary, but this is the fact, they do deserve to be placed here now. They are officially connected(and have been publically since 2010, privately since 2006). It's totally freaky that one of the most racist Negro organisations in existence has suddenly embraced Dianetics and formed an alliance with the Church, but it IS the fact. Colliric (talk) 02:36, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 22 July 2023

[edit]

Please add new article Scientology in the Netherlands to Group 7. Thanks. 2A00:23EE:19C8:BA81:48C:2DFF:FEC5:9914 (talk) 19:52, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Xan747 (talk) 22:54, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Properties

[edit]

This template is getting too large and unwieldy. I have broken out the properties section into its own template, {{Scientology properties}}. That one should be used for every one of the properties rather than using {{Scientology}}.

I have left a select few in this template, positioned subordinate to the organization it houses. Those articles should each have {{Scientology properties}} at the bottom. The occasional few might also have {{Scientology}} if and only if the content of that article has more than minor content about Scientology (such as its purchase).

The Church of Scientology has bought several properties and turned them into museums, and some editors are creating articles about those buildings (not really about Scientology). Those do not need to clutter up this nav-template, but go ahead and add them to {{Scientology properties}} if they have a standalone article.

  ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 09:46, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Split out the litigation articles from this template?

[edit]

@Boud: To respond to your edit summary question no cases in the 2010s and 2020s?, I point you to Scientology and law § Others where there are 7 more cases mentioned from 2010s/2020s. There are so many on the litigation sublist in this template (and I only see it getting longer) that we should probably create a new Template:Scientology litigation to break out just the litigation articles, and leave only a few key cases in Template:Scientology. What do you think?   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 22:22, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Or we could edit the template so the litigation section collapses (using "navbox with collapsible groups"), like is done in Template:Horse equipment, and display only the litigation section—like I have done for the bits/bridles group at the bottom of Snaffle bit.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 22:32, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for answering my question :). I would have been surprised if litigation had stopped!
Same thought: I would rather suggest creating nested sub-groups as in {{COVID-19 pandemic}} or {{Russian invasion of Ukraine}}, with just one section un-hidden by default for people with javascript enabled. A big topic deserves a big - but structured - navigation template. Given that the legal cases are already listed with comments by year (starting year?), choosing decades 1980s, 1990s, 2000s, ... would be one reasonably straightforward choice for sub-groups. Or follow the header/section structure already set up in Scientology and law#Court cases. But I'm very unlikely to be active on the topic - I just noticed a small thing that seemed to need doing - so the weight of my opinion here should be low. Boud (talk) 22:37, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, those examples are mega-navboxes! Okay, I'll think about it, because if I collapse (nest) the litigation section, all the other sections will get nested, too. As for sub-sectioning the litigation entries, I was thinking maybe "by country". The problem with "by decade" is that some of these cases lasted more than a decade, and I don't know whether starting or ending date makes more sense. But I have more pondering to do before I act on it.
I was thinking it might be better to break it out as a separate template like I did with {{Scientology properties}}, where some remained in this template, but many other entries went only into Scientology propert...
...*brain freezing up*...
*crickets*
  ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 01:22, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]