Talk:Dianazene
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dianazene article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 30 days  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Bare-Faced Messiah links
[edit]Shutterbug, if you object to xenu.net, then you're welcome to change the link to one of the many other identical online copies of Russell Miller's book, for which permission was given for use. (And, yes, I do verify it against my hard cover printed edition.) AndroidCat (talk) 05:32, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
- I object to links that go to unreliable, POV-pushing websites. The link you put in does not go to the publishing house page or Google Books or any other reliable and stable site. You added in sites that specialize on the collection of anti-scientology material and that are privately financed for that purpose. The lowest quality possible and a no-no per WP:RS. I am not saying the Miller book should not stay. All I am saying is that WP:V does not require "convenience links" to private websites. Per its "Copyright Note"[1] religio.de is owned and run by a private unemployed person with the name of Winfried Müller[2] "in cooperation with" a retired Lutheran apologetic and his private organization "Dialog Zentrum Berlin"[3]. Shutterbug (talk) 19:18, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
- You didn't always object to www.religio.de repeatedly I see that FACTNet is preferable to clambake And Freewebtown is okay when convenient. (I'm not stalking you, just trying to locate the time frame and location of the previous book link discussion.) Also see Durova's comment on Requests for arbitration/Scientology/Evidence AndroidCat (talk) 21:15, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
- You are right, I was indeed satisfied with freewebtown.com as hosting place for a scanned document but that was a time when Wikisource did not exist or at least I had never heard of it. I changed my mind. As for real documents we could "host" really copyright free material there and link to it from Wikipedia. Hosting in private places leaves the door open to falsification of documents etc. There is no standard for such hosting whereas links to newspapers, governments, (official) university sites etc maintain one. Shutterbug (talk) 23:01, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
- You didn't always object to www.religio.de repeatedly I see that FACTNet is preferable to clambake And Freewebtown is okay when convenient. (I'm not stalking you, just trying to locate the time frame and location of the previous book link discussion.) Also see Durova's comment on Requests for arbitration/Scientology/Evidence AndroidCat (talk) 21:15, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
- By the way, I tried to locate a copy of the book that has been released by the author for online publication and could not find one. Are you sure he and his publishing waived the copyrights? The book is still on sale[http://www.amazon.com/Bare-faced-Messiah-Russell-Miller/dp/0718127641]. Shutterbug (talk) 19:22, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
- Unlike e-meters, you can sell used books. ::rolls eyes:: When I have time, I'll dig up the discussion of the last time we went through all of this. AndroidCat (talk) 19:49, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
- You want to upload an e-meter? Anyway, Wikipedia standards have increased since. Shutterbug (talk) 23:18, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
- Unlike e-meters, you can sell used books. ::rolls eyes:: When I have time, I'll dig up the discussion of the last time we went through all of this. AndroidCat (talk) 19:49, 20 December 2008 (UTC)