:I'm afraid that some of the editors here are misinterpreting the primary sources policy. Primary sources are materials like census data, frequently cited by editors engaged in original research or axe-grinding. But this group seems to think that primary sources are any and all sources connected to SGI, which must be disallowed. This is clearly overreach. When you have a question about Catholic doctrine, it's OK to cite a Catholic theologian or The Catholic Encyclopedia. 
 :Meanwhile we are allowing sources like The Road to Total Freedom: A Sociological Analysis of Scientology. How is that relevant, unless the goal is to imply that both Scientology and the Soka Gakkai are deviant religions? And we allow conspiracy theories sourced to Shukan Shincho, one of those tabloid-style weeklies I refered to earlier, which are notorious for irresponsible journalism. 
 :I'm sorry, but I'm afraid this article has a serious POV problem. It reads like a systematic attempt to paint the organization in an unfavorable light, as if it had been dogged by scandal at every step in its history. There is blatant editorializing (the new "Leadership" section). Many of the few sympathetic statements are followed by a "but" that immediately takes it back.  So, I'm going to tag it as POV, something I've never done before. And if possible I think the tag should stay for a while, to give other editors a chance to work on these issues.