Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scientology/History Article Project

message: It's probably a good idea to use Michel Snoeck / User:Olberon's site carefully. Sometimes I've known him to tailor the facts to fit his conclusions—Not actually changing facts, just ignoring ones that contradict his conclusion. On the other hand, if presented with exhaustive counter-references, he would change his views. In my opinion, trust the facts that he references, but don't assume those are all the facts on the subject. Take the conclusions with a grain of salt. AndroidCat 01:29, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Curiouser and curiouser" said Alice.  Do you have a specific "fact" which he did not actually "change" but which you state he "ignored" while he stated a "conclusion", or are you without an actual specific and simply stating a distrust ? Terryeo 15:39, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I just saw this. Firstly AndroidCat does not know who is posting as Olberon. He just assumes and associates. Secondly claims are made by AndroidCat which are not supported by arguments, facts nor documentation. It is just a general make-wrong. What he also forgets to tell is that he himself has propagated that the majority of the fiction written by L. Ron Hubbard would have been Science Fiction. A claim which has been proven to be erroneous. Probably this is why he opposes to the Michel Snoeck website as evidence is found on there that AndroidCat was in error.--Olberon 17:42, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cite site with caution

message: I have a goal of finding as many published sources as possible, but I do not mind using websites as starting places for my effort. --JWSchmidt 23:52, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you wish to view , Laurie Hamilton's answers, I believe you will obtain good information.  When I have been beaten on by bigoted, beanbrained, narrow minded anti-scientology editors for a long while, I get a little overwhelmed, sometimes (no such editors on Wikipedia, of course).  Her answers to questions are clear and direct. (my opinion). Terryeo 15:32, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  sources 

message: There is the philosophy, that is the idea and knowledge about the idea.  Hubbard called the idea "Scientology" in March of 1952 at Witchita, Kansas in a lecture titled, Scientology: Milestone One.  The lecture is available for sale and I could get you a link on that.  He defined the word, the idea and he gave the background, reasoning and development which led him to use the word.  In the lecture he gave his idea of what the field would encompass.  Until that time his efforts had been within the field which he called Dianetics.  In his lecture of that date he broadened the field he was addressing, stated that Dianetics would be a subfield of Scientology and talked a bit about the relationship of the two.  Then there is the question of when did the organization start which Hubbard created and which he charged with the dissemination of his philosophy, Scientology.  There are several dates because Hubbard first registered a Church but then that did not become the present organization, but the present International Church gives a 1954 date. If you want a source of information on this, say so. The site whatisscientology used to have the 1954 date prominient on its first page (as I recall) but have changed the paged. Terryeo 16:07, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: When did Scientology start