Talk:Incident (Scientology)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Incident (Scientology) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article was nominated for deletion on 6 February 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

Long scale/short scale

Conversation dragged over here from User:Setanta747's talk page...

I'm intrigued by the Long scale/short scale notation you added to Incident (Scientology), but how do we know for sure which Hubbard intended? He was very British-oriented in his thinking, which would make me tend to agree that he was thinking Long scale, but how can we say for sure? wikipediatrix 19:05, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He was born in the USA and undoubtedly have been taught with the short scale number system. I added clarification based on that assumption. Without my assumption, the article remains vague. Feel free to verify that Hubbard used the Short Scale throughout his writings. Cheers. --Mal 19:14, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but he was an extreme anglophile and invariably used British spellings and measurements (such as Hogshead). Until we know for sure - and I'm not sure we can - it would be original research to declare it one way or the other in the article. wikipediatrix 19:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

contested statement removed

(or 89 trillion trillion years ago in another Hubbard lecture {{Fact|date=December 2006}} ).

Please do not return this information to the article without a citation.--BirgitteSB 19:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Incident (Scientology). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060323052459/http://www.clambake.org/archive/books/apobs/index.html to http://www.clambake.org/archive/books/apobs/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:25, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Review

This article needs a serious rewrite. First of all, the word incident is used to mean any incident in the preclear's/person's mind. It could be last week when they tripped and fell on the sidewalk and skinned their knees, but this article only describes long ago past life incidents allegedly common to everyone on earth. The incidents mentioned in this article are taken from Hubbard lectures (and post-lecture writeups) from the 1950s and 1960s, and may or may not have anything to do with modern auditing.

There's too much esoteric stuff in here. For example, the Body Builder Incident. There so much there that would have to be explained before an ordinary reader could understand it. (attention units, MEST body, and why would anyone "build" one?)

There are some good juicy bits in this article (interesting stuff), but it needs some serious editing to bring it together into a cohesive explanation of what is an incident and give some examples. Some of these can be removed because they don't really add any value to the subject.

In fact, most of these are actually describing implants. During auditing, you go over the time when an implant was made... the "incident". Perhaps Incident (Scientology) and Implant (Scientology) should be merged in the rewrite. Or maybe much of this article just needs to move to Implant (Scientology).

Or maybe Engram (Dianetics), Incidents and Implants need to be together... under Auditing (Scientology), because those three are things which you deal with in auditing, and don't really have any value/importance/discussion in a person's everyday life unless and until they are touched upon in auditing (at which time they are "run out" and are of no importance thereafter).

I'll have to think on which is the best way to organize this. I can work on it some more... another day. Grorp (talk) 07:00, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Remove the 2008 template?

Templates are not supposed to stay in articles forever. It has been 16 years. --Guy Macon Alternate Account (talk) 16:51, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I swapped it out for a new {{No footnotes}} which is what it should have been labelled in the first place and it still applies to half the article. Made a bunch of changes including adding other sources, and adding them as inline citations. Will do more later since I took a lot of notes as I was researching sources for this article. I plan on merging Implant (Scientology) into this article. See also my post above at #Review. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 07:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good call. Thanks! --Guy Macon Alternate Account (talk) 19:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]