Talk:Scientology/Portal talk archive

message: *A job well done to John Carter !  This sure looks like all the subpages and main portal page was a lot of work, and it looks great so far!  I'm sure when it all gets fleshed out it will be really sweet.  Cirt 21:41, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Great job! 

message: *Wikipedia:Portal
*Wikipedia:Featured portals - complete list.  
*Wikipedia talk:Featured portal criteria
*Wikipedia:Portal peer review
*Wikipedia talk:Portal peer review
;Good examples:
*  -- Portal:Religion
*  -- Portal:Psychology
*  -- Portal:Christianity
*  -- Portal:Hinduism
Cirt 21:08, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notes on Portal quality 

message: From Portal talk:Psychology#Layout help?
This page layout template is displaying as designed.  The caption displays "on mouseover" - when you move the mouse over the image, the caption displays.  It's considered to be visually more elegant than a typical "thumb"nail image found in most articles. RichardF 00:52, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like a good start. :-)  I would suggest taking a look at the two lists noted at Wikipedia talk:Featured portal criteria#Personal requirements to help you plan and track your work.  RichardF 01:01, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, will do.  Cirt 01:33, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Selected article captions 

message: I started a to do list template to help track portal development activities.  Have at it! RichardF 01:50, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  To do list 

message: The "Things to do" section typically uses related project lists as a way to coordinate such activities.  In this case, you might want to consider folding in the Scientology project's "To Do List" and "Tasklist." RichardF 12:24, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Things to do" section 

message: Here's another idea to play with - Selected quotes.  There's a way to randomly select a specific number of pages to form a list.  For the quotes here, that would be a way to keep adding to them without making the section too long or forcing manual rotations.  I don't think the method has been used with quotes yet, so here are a simple and complex example for DYK lists: Portal:Sustainable development/Did you know and Portal:Religion/Did you know. You can see more about how to use the method at Template:Random subpage, with more examples at Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Random_subpage. RichardF 02:26, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the other randomized sections all could use a rule-of thumb for number of lines for text and height for images.  Then they'll tend to even out more.  The toughest section to balance that way will be quotes. RichardF 12:45, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point, so I moved the quotes to its own section so it won't affect balancing.  Now just to balance out the other sections.  Cirt 17:02, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Selected quotes 

message: Don't forget to add links to the List of portals, Portal Directory and the Community Portal. RichardF 00:31, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Almost, I added the pulldate for the Community portal. RichardF (talk) 04:03, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  How is that determined?  Cirt (talk) 04:06, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a week.  I probably could have added another day for wikitime, but they stick around longer if nothing else shows up anyway.  You have to click "edit" up at least one heading to see the comment that explains how to do it. RichardF (talk) 04:11, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  Cirt (talk) 04:38, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Getting the word out 

message: Cirt asked me to comment on this here. Since I tend to work on portals no one else is much interested in editing, I usually just pick something off the top of my head. A relatively good example would be Portal:Sustainable development.  What I usually do is look at the number of lines on the subpages view, e.g., Portal:Sustainable development/Selected article, Portal:Sustainable development/Selected biography, Portal:Sustainable development/Selected picture and Portal:Sustainable development/Did you know.  Taking any images into consideration, I start trying around 10 +/- lines then take it from there.  This applies mostly to any sections in left or right columns. Because quotes are so variable, I always display them full width. Let me know if you have any other questions. :-) RichardF 18:44, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Each of the subpages I mentioned uses a layout page that includes a default image size, e.g., Portal:Sustainable development/Selected article/Layout. Those sizes are based on a number of portals that have reached featured status.  They seem to work pretty well. If an image has unusual dimensions, then the image size can be adjusted on the subpage to keep the overall section height about the same. RichardF 19:44, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  - I shortened any lengthy article and bio blurbs to 10 lines.  Also made all article/bio/selected picture sections use default image sizing.  Displays much better in the portal now.  There are a few bio blurbs that are a tad short that I will expand, but I think that's about it for now.  Cirt 20:20, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool! :-) RichardF 20:26, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rules of thumb for rotated section sizes 

message: All of the images need credits, like at Portal:Sustainable development/Selected picture/Layout. RichardF 20:31, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You basically use the best credit you can find. That often turns out to be usernames. I assume the same applies to flickr. RichardF 21:08, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, that's what I did.  They're all free-use as well.  Cirt 21:26, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image credits 

message: Just a thought, any interest in adding images to the quotes? See an example at Portal:Sustainable development/Selected quote/Layout. RichardF 21:23, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Finding good images certainly is a pain. I keep having to find replacements when something gets deleted! :-( I don't know if there's a way to left-align with the quotes template currently used, but a layout page certainly could be adjusted however you wanted it to look.  RichardF 21:45, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Eh, not such a big deal either way.  Now, to bulk up some bios and make sure they're all around 10 lines, and then for a review.  Thanks for all of your help!  Cirt 00:55, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotes layout 

message: I made the criteria more selective for the Selective article section, see Portal:Scientology/Selected article.  Now that we have a few more WP:GA and WP:FA articles related to WP:SCN, we should tighten and only allow Featured or Good articles to be selected in that section of the portal.  Unfortunately, until we have a good number of Featured/Good articles that are biographies, that section won't work yet with the same tight criteria.  Cirt 04:08, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Selected article criteria 

message: *This is certainly interesting and doable: Portal:Religion/On this day.  As obviously we'd need 365 entries, this would take a long, long time to work on, and I don't think it's crucial to improve the portal further, just an added nicety for sometime in the future.  Cirt (talk)
**Scientology holidays and Timeline of Scientology are two existing articles that might be used to input to this potential new section.  However, 365 entries is still a lot...  Cirt (talk)
*Portal:North West England/Features -- Another nice idea, from a portal at WP:FPORTC.  Cirt (talk)
:* Done — [sd] 01:48, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *Thanks so much for adding this!  Cirt (talk) 01:58, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: * I'm curious. Do you have enough to expand this to a "Featured content" section, like at Portal:Religion/Categories and Main topics? RichardF (talk) 16:52, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *See Portal:Scientology/Features, for the statistics.  Currently the Scientology project does not have any featured lists, or featured pictures.  I'd also hesitate before splitting that stuff off into a subpage of the main portal page, because there are not as many categories and main topics either.  But I'd be happy to hear your thoughts on this, I suppose it is a possibility.  Cirt (talk) 16:56, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: * I didn't mean the subpage thing, just the opportunity to highlight any other types of featured content, if available. :-) RichardF (talk) 18:00, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *Oh, well as far as I can tell, what's listed at Portal:Scientology/Features is all that's there, unless there are other WP:FA/WP:GA articles out there that are relevant/related but just haven't yet been tagged with .  Cirt (talk) 18:02, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ideas to work on longer term 

message: *This portal has had a Portal peer review, which has since been archived.  Please see Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Scientology/archive1 for more information.  Cirt (talk) 00:58, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portal peer review 

message: Its very blue. Can something be done about that, it looks extremely bland. Clinkophonist (talk) 23:14, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting you mention it, the coloring was specifically addressed at the Featured Portal Candidate discussion, and then the portal was promoted successfully as a Featured Portal shortly thereafter.  What different color adjustments would you suggest?  Cirt (talk) 23:19, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Best Portal"? 

message: I thought Wikipedia was supposed to be an encyclopedia, not an anti-Scientology site. You've got quotes from a bunch of Scientology hating randoms (since when is Trey Parker an expert on Scientology?), the "selected articles" consist of mostly anti-Scientology articles and films (because the Simpsons and Time are the holy grail of knowledge and intellect). If I tried to put say, Nietzsche quotes, anti-Christian articles and black metal on the Christianity portal, it would be reverted in less than a second. 
Of course, this garbage deserves a star, because "high quality" in Wikipedia terms is "going with popular opinion/attitude".  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.111.51 (talk) 11:33, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The portal has been through a thorough review, twice, by multiple editors. The "Selected article" section contains WP:GA and WP:FA content, so those selections have themselves also been through review. The "Selected quotes" section contains a balanced number of quotes from multiple varying viewpoints, both supportive and otherwise.  Cirt (talk) 20:04, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. The fact that many of the articles relevant to Scientology at GA and FA class is basically irrelevant. If the editors who wish to put forward the pro-Scientology perspective were to improve more of those articles to GA or FA level, they would be included as well. If the originator of this thread is one such editor, I encourage him to join the Wikipedia:WikiProject Scientology and help with the development of the articles favorable to Scientology. John Carter (talk) 20:14, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not pro-Scientology, I'm just tired of double standards. There's plenty of articles and quotes that are anti-Christian, yet do we see them on the anti-Christian page? No, because there's an over representation of Christians on Wikipedia who would be offended and a minority of Scientologists. These "editors" are nothing more than high school drop outs going with the tide. --121.44.111.51 (talk) 11:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually at present the quote balance is overweighted in support of Scientology.  Cirt (talk) 12:43, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Why even have quotes? They're ridiculous, since when have the opinions of celebrities counted for anything? Also, John Carter, your comment on my page was hilarious, basically, because Wikipedia in general is pro-Christian and has no idea about Scientology, it's OK to have a bunch of idiotic crap on their page. Thanks John, that 166 IQ shows in the brilliance of your logic.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.111.51 (talk) 21:53, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "So-called Neutrality" 

message: *Portal:Scientology/Intro
"Today the total body of beliefs and practices of Dianetics and Scientology are the sole property of the Church of Spiritual Technology" - How can a belief or a practice be property? No one can own a belief or a practice. An organization can own a copyright on books and documents describing a belief, but not the belief itself. Reinderientalk/contribs 06:58, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Tentatively making some changes until I hear anything to the contrary. Reinderientalk/contribs 19:01, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Changed should be made at lede/intro of main article, Scientology, not here. -- Cirt (talk) 17:25, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. And, actually, I think that WP:TRUTH might apply here. If the ideas and beliefs are protected by copyright, patent, or whatever, then, yeah, they are the property of a group. Certainly some of the recent gene patents would also indicate as much. John Carter (talk) 17:37, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Further discussion about that, should take place at Talk:Scientology, about the main article, Scientology, and not here. -- Cirt (talk) 17:48, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The information in Scientology and its introduction is unique and different from the information here. If you want to copy the information here to the article there, then I would agree that such changes should be discussed there, but insofar as this is the only copy, I don't see how it should be made invulnerable to correction. Regarding gene patents, I find it somewhat silly to compare a patentable and concrete medical concept to a religious belief. The Catholic church does not hold a copyright on the bible, nor is belief in God property of the church. Reinderientalk/contribs 02:52, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the WP:LEAD at the main article Scientology should be exactly the same as the portal intro subpage here. Please keep such discussions about changes to content, to Talk:Scientology. -- Cirt (talk) 03:08, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: , updated. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 03:12, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Property? 

message: Note:  This portal navigation can be placed on articles, and is commonly placed in the See also section of an article on Wikipedia, using the following code:

This displays as:

Cirt (talk).
There is a specific difference between the Bible and a contemporary document, religious or no. Most of the material in The Bible has been "out of copyright" for about 2000 years. The written and spoken words of L. Ron Hubbard are protected by copyright. That makes them, as it would make any work within the last seven or so decades the "intellectual property" of the creator or his assigns. This also means that the entity to whom copyright is assigned [in this case, The Religious Technology Center] retains the right, under copyright law, to take legal action against plagiarism, and unauthorized publication of the work, etc.
A practical body of the materials of Scientology is available for free on the "Scientology Handbook" website, in any case. There is, therefore, no substantiation of the criticism of Scientology that it is not freely available to anyone who wishes to learn about it and use it.
68.167.17.61 (talk) 23:48, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Placement on articles 

message: WikiProject Portals is back!
The project was rebooted and completely overhauled on April 17th, 2018. Its goals are to revitalize the entire portal system, make building and maintaining portals easier, support the ongoing improvement of portals and the editors dedicated to this, and design the portals of the future.
As of May 2nd, 2018, membership is at 60 editors, and growing. You are welcome to join us.
There are design initiatives for revitalizing the portals system as a whole, and for improving each component of portals.  So far, 2 new dynamic components have been developed: Template:Transclude lead excerpt and Template:Transclude random excerpt.
Tools are provided for building and maintaining portals, including automated portals that update themselves in various ways.
And, if you are bored and would like something to occupy your mind, we have a wonderful task list.
From your friendly neighborhood Portals WikiProject. Hope to see you there. Sincerely,      — The Transhumanist    07:44, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notice from the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals|Portals WikiProject]]