Talk:L. Ron Hubbard bibliography

I'm not sure
I'm not sure what to do with this article. Suggestions?? Falphin 21:20, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I realize that a seperate bibliography article is unconventional in Wikipedia, but it seemed called for in this case: that complete list was part of the L. Ron Hubbard article, and if some enthusiast wants to, it could be made much longer still, what with all the transcribed lectures, collected memos, etc. that have been published. So I created a selected bibliography on the biography page, with a link to this more extensive one. If the long list stays on the bio page, readers have to scroll through the whole thing before getting to useful external links at the bottom of the page. If we don't make the list availble somehow, I expect that some Scientologists would insist on putting it back (Hubbard-related sites have some history of edit wars).  So, I vote for this new article, unless you have a better idea.  BTfromLA 21:36, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * ok, now I understand what this article is about. As long as it is discussed on the talk page of the main article I have no objections. Falphin 21:48, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

removed category tag
This article is in two sub-categories of Category:Scientology, Category:L. Ron Hubbard and Category:Scientology books. In general an article shouldn't be in both a category and one of its sub-categories. There's an exception when it's the article that defines the sub-category, but this article doesn't define either. Accordingly, it's being removed from Category:Scientology. -- Antaeus Feldspar 4 July 2005 00:17 (UTC)
 * For what it's worth, I agree with Antaeus' change of categorization, as described above. BTfromLA 8 July 2005 03:11 (UTC)

In the interest of NPOV: added http://www.clambake.org/

Reorganize By Levels
I dunno about putting Hubbard's books into only two categories and having everything in chronological order. It doesn't seem that helpful. Is there a way to reorganize these and other works such as lecture series into levels, say Basic, Pre-Grades, Grades, NEDs, Clear, OT Prep, and OT? Sort like this. Is there a better organized list out there? Chiok 01:48, 29 March 2006 (UTC)


 * There are a few real Hubbard bibliographies, http://web.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journal/mjr/pdf/2003/breit2003.pdf mentions some, "For the literary part of Hubbard's oeuvre exists a fairly complete and dependable bibliography: William J. Widder, The Fiction of L. Ron Hubbard." I think it's quite helpful to segregate the Dianetics/Scientology material from the tales and novels, but there should also be a section for several screenplays. Does radio drama fit here? Dimension X did a production of Hubbard's "The Professor is a Thief." Hypatea (talk) 11:41, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, we'd have to take a look and see if those works by Hubbard were significantly discussed in WP:RS/WP:V secondary sources. Cirt (talk) 11:52, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

the Dianetics and Scientology section
Two-thirds of the Dianetics & Scientology section is incorrect. Most of the books listed here as being from the 1980s and 1990s are actually older books. Some of these are also BOTWO (Based on the Works of) books, and not actually written or compiled by Hubbard himself. wikipediatrix 06:49, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I've tried to address this by placing more of the later editions in parentheses after the first edition. Sources of information for first publication place/date are the 1975 Technical Dictionary and the 1976 Technical Bulletins I-X. DavidCooke 22:19, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

the science fiction stuff
"Bare-faced Messiah" refers to many more stories in the pulp magazines than this article does. Also, there is no mention of two stories which Hubbard seems to have considered seminal works: "Excalibur" (never published) and "Revolt in the Stars" (slated to become a movie, never finished). I don't have all the facts and could be mistaken.Hypatea (talk) 14:37, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Well first we'd have to investigate further into WP:RS/WP:V secondary sources to see what is said in them, and then determine what could be added to the article, with citations for those sources. Cirt (talk) 11:52, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * In progress Cirt, all additions will be sourced as needed, will try to finish adding and sourcing next week. The ISBN numbers don't lead me anywhere, are these important for other reasons? Also, I believe we should give priority of publication while mentioning Scientology's Golden Age and Galaxy reprints. Yes? Hypatea (talk) 18:26, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Lots of WP:NOR violations
Lots of material has been added to this article which appears to be interpretation from primary sources, as opposed to material backed up to WP:RS/WP:V, secondary sources, and I have tagged that material as such. We can not build this article simply out of our own personal interpretations from primary sources. If that is all that this is going to be, than this has no place on this project. Cirt (talk) 22:27, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Still in progress Cirt. Will read through those WP:RS/WP:V again soon. These are primary sources mainly, the magazines where the stories appeared. Also, the secondary sources are at the bottom of the page now, and the information checks out, but I don't know how to do footnotes properly. Look for update by Sunday. Hypatea (talk) 18:10, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I think WP:CITE and WP:CIT should help with figuring out footnoting, but the overreliance on primary sources doesn't really cut it, strays too close to violating WP:NOR. Cirt (talk) 19:47, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, will go through it. I made a mistake with one of the sources in the references anyway, a good secondary source is: |L. Ron Hubbard and Scientology -- An Annotated Survey of Primary and Selected Secondary Literature, Marco Frenschkowski, Mainz (Germany), rather than the other paper listed from the same university. I'll fix that now and come back after I've imbibed the wikipedian lore. Hypatea (talk) 11:44, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

not a copyright violation
University of Marburg Marburg Journal of Religion staff said it's fine to use their material if attribution is given and will check this page when they have time to make sure attribution is given correctly. Hypatea (talk) 13:37, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * We need to confirm this, preferably with WP:OTRS. Cirt (talk) 14:47, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Copyvio - version of article with verbatim copy/pasted text
FYI to investigating admin - This version of the article had whole sections copy/pasted from the Marburg article. Compare and see for yourself. Cirt (talk) 14:49, 5 June 2008 (UTC)


 * "Whole sections" meaning short plot synopses. The author of the original internet peer-reviewed journal article has been contacted and invited to share his thoughts here. Hypatea (talk) 16:25, 5 June 2008 (UTC)


 * You have seemed to have failed to grasp that what you have done is copy-and-pasted significant portions of text into an unneeded article. seicer  &#x007C;  talk  &#x007C;  contribs  16:27, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Reference text
A good source for a list of L. Ron Hubbard's works is "The Fiction of L. Ron Hubbard" by William J. Widder by published by Bridge Pub. Science Fiction studies calls it "no less exahustive than its predecessors in the field, and every fictional piece Hubbard ever wrote..is listed, with many also described."Orangepulp81 (talk) 23:38, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Add a book
Found a text that is worthy of inclusion here. Can we add “L. Ron Hubbard: Images of a Lifetime” published by Bridge Pub in 1996? ISBN: 1-57318-028-9. Library Journal calls it a “handsome large-format book, with over 250 color and black-and-white photos, chronicles the life of the founder of Scientology by focusing on his myriad achievements”

Reference: O Sickey, ,Ben. (1996). L. ron hubbard: Images of a lifetime. Library Journal, 121(12), 126-126.Orangepulp81 (talk) 22:37, 30 June 2011 (UTC)


 * No, because Hubbard didn't write it. Grorp (talk) 07:26, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Merge proposal
I'm not sure there's a valid reason why L. Ron Hubbard bibliography and Written works of L. Ron Hubbard are separate articles. They seem like WP:CONTENTFORKs. Wikipedia isn't a catalog. What if we choose L. Ron Hubbard bibliography as the main article, put the content from Written works of L. Ron Hubbard into the top half of it, the lists to follow, then redirect Written works of L. Ron Hubbard → L. Ron Hubbard bibliography? Grorp (talk) 07:54, 20 September 2023 (UTC)


 * I think you can Wp:BOLDly implement this. I support the proposal. Cambial — foliar❧ 08:13, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Good call, I've merged them. Feoffer (talk) 23:46, 20 September 2023 (UTC)