Talk:Scientology and hypnosis

I love the idea of the article, but it's atrociously written and filled with misspellings and POV. Needs LOTS of work. wikipediatrix 16:29, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

If they are allowed, I hope some practicing Scientologists add their perspective on this subject. Zeke pbuh 17:31, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, the page needs a lot of work. I made one quick edit to remove the word "homosexuality" from a list including rape and murder. (before the edit: "murder, rape, homosexuality and other criminal and disgraceful behaviour") Calling homosexuality criminal or disgraceful is inappropriate POV, and the issue being addressed is more clearly explained in the "Hallucination" section.--M0ng010id 15:37, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

I am tagging this article for deletion. Hypnosis has nothing to do with Scientology practices. See http://www.scientology.org/wis/wiseng/wis4-6/wis5_2.htm. Take a look at Stupid Fool’s recent edits and I think his purpose for creating this page will be clear. Nuview 12:56, 9 May 2006 (PST)


 * Correction: Not "Hypnosis has nothing to do with Scientology practices."  "The Church of Scientology claims that hypnosis has nothing to do with Scientology practices."  There's a substantial difference between the two -- which Nuview has been around long enough to have no excuse for not knowing. -- Antaeus Feldspar 14:25, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Problem with this article...
There's a major problem with this article, unfortunately. Namely, that close examination shows that nearly all of it is taken straight from the Anderson Report -- sometimes whole sentences taken word-for-word. While this gives certain assurances of the verifiability of the information, and while it might not be a copyright violation (does Australia have similar policies as the United States on the copyright status of their official documents?) it does present something of a problem. Recommendations? -- Antaeus Feldspar 23:15, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Mind control
I would like to add this article to Category:Mind control. I am asking first because this could be interpreted as redundant; it is already categorized under Hypnosis, which is subcategorized under Mind control. There is some overlap between these two categories already, and I believe that the covert nature of the hypnosis as claimed in the article qualifies it for inclusion in both. I have no wish to weaken the legitimacy of this topic. thoughts? —popefauvexxiii 21:07, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Biassed and unfair article with no place on Wikipedia
I have to say this is a very poorly written article indeed. I am not a Scientologist, but have looked into the subject in great depth, and also into hypnosis, and I feel this article is frequently inaccurate and misleading with respect to both subjects. There are no references, and many of the comments are blatantly untrue and unfair. I am not defending Scientology, rather more the quality of Wikipedia - the bias of any one person has no place here. Orgaelin 10:26, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Orgaelin and recommend that the article be rewritten completely or deleted. It appears that the writer is attempting to redefine Scientology auditing as a form of hypnotism. 69.12.131.206 06:03, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Looking over the article, I couldn't find ANYTHING that wasn't unsourced hearsay, POV, gossip and Original Research, so I removed it all except the introductory sentence. Someone should start over but this time do it fair and do it right. wikipediatrix 18:57, 19 August 2007 (UTC)