User:Justanother/Model RfC

Request for Comments - Use of the "truthaboutscientology" website
Comment - I am setting up this RfC a bit differently to make it more friendly to non-involved editors. Previously involved editors, please respect the way I have divided this up. I am trying to hold the threaded arguments down as they can get quite contentious. It is appropriate to politely ask an editor to clarify their view if you do not understand their statement.

Neutral statement of dispute
A number of editors oppose use of the "truthaboutscientology" website (http://www.truthaboutscientology.com/), abbreviated TAS, as a reliable source in biographies of living persons and other articles while a number of editors support its use. The site is generally used in WP:BLP articles to establish that the subject of the article is a Scientologist and the specific courses done, levels attained, donations made, or other activities in Scientology of the subject of the article. Please note that while the RfC is taking place here, this issue affects 20-30 or more Scientology-series articles (if someone can come up with a better count, please correct this number). This dispute is not about the appropriate use of Scientology publications as sources, it is about use of the TAS website.

Statement(s) opposing use
Note: Please do not argue back and forth in threaded discussion. Please respect that this area is only for statements of opposition. Misplaced statements may be moved to the appropriate area.

Below are the reasons that use of the TAS site as a source is inappropriate for Wikipedia.

Thank you. --Justanother 23:17, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) WP:BLP issues - Perhaps the most important consideration is the requirement that WP:BLP articles be built on high quality, reliable, sources."'Be very firm about high quality references, particularly about details of personal lives.'"As will be shown, TAS is not such a source.
 * 2) The overall nature of the site violates WP:V - The TAS site is the creation of Kristi Wachter. She is a critic of Scientology and also owns the sister website http://www.scientology-lies.com/. Kristi is unusual in that she maintains two sites; one a standard critic site and the other allegedly "Safe for Scientologists" which means only that she will be attacking their Church and their beliefs without revealing confidential materials - not very "safe" at all."'I hope you'll consider visiting my other web site, www.truthaboutscientology.com, which is intended more for Scientologists than for non-Scientologists (the intended audience for this site).'"Kristi's sites are self-published, one-sided, and inherently POV. The violate the very spirit of WP:V, one of our key policies, which states:"Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy."and again:"Self-published sources (online and paper)""Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published books, personal websites, and blogs are largely not acceptable as sources."and in the case of WP:BLP, we add never as in "never be used" in respect to "sources" such as Kristi's:"Self-published sources, such as blogs, should never be used as third-party sources about living persons, even if the author is a well-known professional researcher or writer; see WP:BLP."
 * 3) The nature of the sources themselves is problematic - While in theory one could use the Scientology mags themselves, it is important to understand that the materials that Kristi claims to be using, things like Impact magazines or old Church magazines, often just have a list of names, not an article. A list of names sometimes pages long like so-and-so are members of the IAS or so-and-so finished a course this week with no other information, just a list of names. It is OR to assume that a simple name in a list of names refers to anyone in an article here. For example, Intelius.com shows 280 Catherine Bell's, just in the US. How can we say that the name "Catherine Bell" in a list of names of course completions refers to the Catherine Bell of this article? We cannot.
 * 4) Use of the TAS site is unnecessary - Notable Scientologists can be sourced in RS as Scientologists. Further, for this purpose Scientology websites are RS and the Church of Scientology Celebrity Centre maintains a website, http://www.scientology.cc/, that identifies Scientology celebrities as well as telling about their activities as Scientologists. No need to use a non-RS "source" like TAS.
 * 5) Proper use of Church publications - Similar to the above, there is a proper use of Church magazines. If you have the magazine in hand, and it clearly refers to the subject of the article, then just cite it like you would any reference; let's leave the one-sided, self-published sites out of the equation, please.

Statement(s) supporting use
Note: Please do not argue back and forth in threaded discussion. Please respect that this area is only for statements of support. Misplaced statements may be moved to the appropriate area.



Comments by non-involved editors
Note: This means editors other than those that normally edit in the Scientology-series articles and other than ALL those editors that have edit warred over this topic on numerous Scientology series articles. Please do not argue back and forth in threaded discussion. Please respect that this area is only for comments by non-involved editors. Misplaced statements may be moved to the appropriate area.



Other discussion
Note: This area can be for any other disussion. Editors may move threads here if they care to so as to keep threaded arguments out of the above areas.